• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Afghans Protest Alleged Koran Desecration

Re: Afghans vent fury over Koran burning, U.S. apologizes

AdamT said:
Seems to have worked fine.
Click to expand...

Yell, tell that to the families of the four American troops were murdered over this crap.

Muslims need to grow up and get a grip. We need to stop giving into them everytime they get their fur rubbed the wrong way.
 
apdst said:
Why don't we see you taking the same blaise attitude toward a book?
Click to expand...

i did
doesn't bug me that the korans were burned
hate that our troops' insensitivity to the native culture precipitated this uproar
but as far as burning the book, meh
 
Re: Afghans vent fury over Koran burning, U.S. apologizes

X Factor said:
I don't think it's made anything better. In fact, it might have made things worse by emboldening those who want to **** with us. Do you really think people who think this level of violence is ok are going to be swayed by an apology? It sure doesn't appear so.
Click to expand...

"Emboldening" :lol:

Now there's a blast from the (neocon/Bush/nightmare) past.
 
Re: Afghans vent fury over Koran burning, U.S. apologizes

apdst said:
Yell, tell that to the families of the four American troops were murdered over this crap.

Muslims need to grow up and get a grip. We need to stop giving into them everytime they get their fur rubbed the wrong way.
Click to expand...

The troops were killed because of the book burning -- not because we apologized for the mistake. :roll:
 
Re: Afghans vent fury over Koran burning, U.S. apologizes

apdst said:
Yell, tell that to the families of the four American troops were murdered over this crap.

Muslims need to grow up and get a grip. We need to stop giving into them everytime they get their fur rubbed the wrong way.
Click to expand...

We could probably do that a lot better if we weren't fighting wars on their soil.
 
justabubba said:
i did
doesn't bug me that the korans were burned
hate that our troops' insensitivity to the native culture precipitated this uproar
but as far as burning the book, meh
Click to expand...

But, you still blame our troops for the problem. :lamo

Nice!!
 
Re: Afghans vent fury over Koran burning, U.S. apologizes

StillBallin75 said:
We could probably do that a lot better if we weren't fighting wars on their soil.
Click to expand...

If psycho Muslims hadn't murdered 3,000 of our countrymen, we wouldn't be fighting on their soil.
 
justabubba said:
67+ year old grave sites
hope they did not disturb the residents
so hurtful [/s]
Click to expand...


That's an unfeeling remark, in my opinion.

The age of those WWII graves is unimportant, what is important is what they represent.

The desecration of these graves is worse, as it was deliberate, while the burning of the Koran was accidental.
 
Mya said:
Now in Libya Islamists are desecrating headstones commemorating British and Allied servicemen, killed during World War II, over Koran burning. :(


Insult to WWII heroes: Graves of British soldiers smashed and desecrated by Libyan Islamists in protest over U.S. soldiers' Koran burning | Mail Online
Click to expand...

It also goes to show you that we should stop helping this Islamic fanatics and let them kill each other off like we're doing in Syria. WE JUST GOT DONE HELPING THE LIBYANS!! And already they're acting like any other Islamic nation. Screw these people man.
 
Re: Afghans vent fury over Koran burning, U.S. apologizes

AdamT said:
You would certainly know how military folk feel better than I would, but I think those feelings are not based on facts. As a factual matter, Democrats consistently supported measures to benefit the troops more than Bush and the Republicans, from pay raises, to the GI bill, to VA funding, to shorter deployments, and all down the line. Of course Bush said all the right things and never passed up a photo op, but in terms of what he actually DID I think he treated the troops like dog ****.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree, for a few reasons.
1) I served when Clinton was POTUS. Holy crap were we poor. I had to duct tape my Vietnam eraflak jacket closed, we could only afford to take half of my unit out to train because we didn't have enough rounds to train the other half, and we ended up buying half of the equipment we needed (shovels, axes, duct tape, etc) with our own money so we could train at all. Clinton did NOTHING for the military. It is the main reason I've always resented him. That, and I was in port with the USS Cole the day before it got hit and he didn't do anything about it.
2) While Bush was POTUS, like I said, he did deploy us heavily. However, he did a lot to help us as well. Sure, the deployments sucked. But the good things he did will be around long after the deployments stop. The best example is the Post 9/11 GI Bill. He did oppose it at first, but, the stipulation he campaigned for and received is what made it great. The transferability of benefits to a spouse or child. My son can go to college now because of Bush. I had no chance in **** of sending him before that.
3) His pay increases were sane. A lot of Dems wanted more pay increases. We didn't. Why would we want less money? Because it brings "mercenaries" in, as we call them. A lot of guys were re-enlisting and staying in during the WOT timeframe because of bonuses and benefits. Guys like me, who will be around when this stuff stops, don't like people that come in for money. Its not why an individual should serve. Sure, its nice to get more money and better benefits, but if thats the reason a guy is staying in, he's got his priorities in the wrong order.
Finally, its the give a crap factor. I know a lot people don't understand it, but when you have a POTUS who cares, who trumpets the military's accomplishments the way Bush did, it means something to us. Obama just doesn't do that. Sure, he trumpets the Navy SEALs or Dakota Meyer, but they're easy to cheer for. What about the regular grunts slugging it out everyday with no glamour? Nope, nothing for us.
 
MarineTpartier said:
It also goes to show you that we should stop helping this Islamic fanatics and let them kill each other off like we're doing in Syria. WE JUST GOT DONE HELPING THE LIBYANS!! And already they're acting like any other Islamic nation. Screw these people man.
Click to expand...

Allawites and Druze are considered Heretics and not Muslim. Nor are Christians. Syria has exceptionally strong minority religious rights because Allawites are deemed heretics and serious danger exists to them from Sunnis & Shiia.

And Assad is leaning heavily on two pure Allawites units to do much of the killing.

Syria is an odd case where those doing much of the killing aren't considered to be Muslim.
 
Last edited:
obvious Child said:
Allawites and Druze are considered Heretics and not Muslim. Nor are Christians. Syria has exceptionally strong minority religious rights because Allawites are deemed heretics and serious danger exists to them from Sunnis & Shiia.

And Assad is leaning heavily on two pure Allawites units to do much of the killing.

Syria is an odd case where those doing much of the killing aren't considered to be Muslim.
Click to expand...

I don't care who's killing who. As long as we don't get involved and help either side, you know what I'm saying?
 
MarineTpartier said:
I don't care who's killing who. As long as we don't get involved and help either side, you know what I'm saying?
Click to expand...

So you were against Clinton's action to prevent wholesale genocide? I honestly don't see how we can take the high ground by doing nothing in Libya after giving the Europeans endless flak for Srbrenica. Benghazi would have make the dutch failure look quaint.

If we invaded Iraq partially because Saddam was torturing his people, it is very inconsistent to just let a dictator murder a million people.

Furthermore, getting rid of Assad reduces Iran's power. But at the same time, I agree with the Israelis that it is preferable to have a neighbor you dislike, but is predictable and keeps your border the quietest in the entire region (yes, I've been to the Golan Heights border and saw the cute UN base in the no man's land) then the unknown.
 
obvious Child said:
So you were against Clinton's action to prevent wholesale genocide? I honestly don't see how we can take the high ground by doing nothing in Libya after giving the Europeans endless flak for Srbrenica. Benghazi would have make the dutch failure look quaint.

If we invaded Iraq partially because Saddam was torturing his people, it is very inconsistent to just let a dictator murder a million people.

Furthermore, getting rid of Assad reduces Iran's power. But at the same time, I agree with the Israelis that it is preferable to have a neighbor you dislike, but is predictable and keeps your border the quietest in the entire region (yes, I've been to the Golan Heights border and saw the cute UN base in the no man's land) then the unknown.
Click to expand...

We invaded Iraq because of WMD's, which we know now don't exist. That was the primary reason for invasion. Stopping the treatment of the civilians was a secondary mission. As far as these other countries, screw them. I am tired of us helping Middle Eastern countries out only for them to turn around and desecrate graves, burn American flags, etc. I can't see how you don't agree on this. I thought this would be one issue you and I would agree on.
 
MarineTpartier said:
We invaded Iraq because of WMD's, which we know now don't exist. That was the primary reason for invasion. Stopping the treatment of the civilians was a secondary mission. As far as these other countries, screw them. I am tired of us helping Middle Eastern countries out only for them to turn around and desecrate graves, burn American flags, etc. I can't see how you don't agree on this. I thought this would be one issue you and I would agree on.
Click to expand...

A couple of things, no reasonable person could possibly believe wmds was the reason for the invasion. I don't go the oil route, but at best we could only truely believe he had a few left overs, with no way to really house them.

Nor did the people ever really figure into it. We added injury to injury. When you watch Saddam kill all his enemies, wait until he is done, watch the people suffer for years, and then when all of that has finally settled down, thena nd only then, you bring war? No, they were nto a concern.
 
Re: Afghans vent fury over Koran burning, U.S. apologizes

MarineTpartier said:
The initial entry into Afghanistan was MASTERFUL. If you've never read books on that, I suggest you do. If anything for the entertainment value. It makes a great read. The Army SF guys I have worked with say that operation was an ODA's wet dream. It was exactly what they train for and exist for. I applaud Bush for allowing that type of war to happen. The follow up is what screwed it up.
I agree, Iraq was a mistake to go into. I have shifted my views a little on it. I think I was blinded by how well we did while we were there and confused that with the reason we went to begin with. We didn't go for the right reasons, I will agree. However, the way we fought it was well done. It hurt initially in '04-'06. We learned our lessons and realized that we couldn't go into a COIN mindset until we beat the bad guys. That's the whole premise of COIN. You can't shift to it before the area is secure. You have to have a safe environment to let groups like medical teams, construction teams, and agricultural teams come in. That's the mistake we're making in Afghanistan. Instead of taking it slow, like in Iraq. We are trying to force Iraq to happen in Afghanistan, if that makes sense. It can't be forced and its a different country.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you. It was masterful and the follow up was a screw up. But that's not what I'm arguing. Bush could have used those masteful and skill people, gone in on 9/12, had the bad guy, and been gone. There never wa sa need to occupy Afghanistan. And being there does not make us safer.

Nor I have I criticized any soldiers. The problem was always leadership and the reasons for going.
 
Mya said:
That's an unfeeling remark, in my opinion.

The age of those WWII graves is unimportant, what is important is what they represent.

The desecration of these graves is worse, as it was deliberate, while the burning of the Koran was accidental.
Click to expand...

by now, you should have figured out i could give a rip how you "feel"

what they did to those graves hurt no one
 
Connery said:
Nothing will appease these people. They do not want us there. We should leave them alone. Senseless killing over a mistake, not likely, this is bound to happen when those who occupy a country are not wanted.
Click to expand...


Yep. I agree with you Connery. These people are so totally bloodthirsty that nothing on this earth will appease them.
 
Boo Radley said:
A couple of things, no reasonable person could possibly believe wmds was the reason for the invasion. I don't go the oil route, but at best we could only truely believe he had a few left overs, with no way to really house them.

Nor did the people ever really figure into it. We added injury to injury. When you watch Saddam kill all his enemies, wait until he is done, watch the people suffer for years, and then when all of that has finally settled down, thena nd only then, you bring war? No, they were nto a concern.
Click to expand...

The dude used WMD's on his own people. UN inspectors would never say he didn't have them.
BTW, who watched him kill all his enemies?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom