• 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!

Photos show U.S. GIs posing with dead Afghans[W:1146]

Cephus said:
I don't think war was the wrong way to go, I think that the way we did it was rushed and based both on American bloodlust and demands for revenge, plus the Bush administration realizing that it could push through personal agendas in the guise of fighting terrorism. Had we actually cared who we went to war with, instead of this ill-defined "war on terrorism" nonsense, had we waited until we actually had the facts instead of pretending we knew what we were talking about, things would have been much better. The whole "we're going to fight terrorism worldwide, no matter what" nonsense is just that.
Click to expand...

The trouble is terrorist groups are small, quick, hidden organizations. Armies are large, slower, and blunt force. Using them is like trying to do surgery with a baseball bat. Not effective.

So while I think we agree there is a role for the military, the fact remains that invading and using the full army just was too much to effectively do the job.
 
apdst said:
We had already tried the law enforcement approach and it was a failure.
Click to expand...

That's actually incorrect. We were more asleep and doing nothing prior to 9/11.
 
Thunder said:
I'm sorry......respecting those who what?

:lamo
Click to expand...



"tried".... You spend so much time saying anything but stating these soldiers did not commit war crimes.

We know why.


Again, you say we should "respect" the taliban savages that tried to kill the us soldiers you "condem" for the "crime" of snapping a picture.


It's pretty clear whom you consider "war criminal" and who you "respect".
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
"tried".... You spend so much time saying anything but stating these soldiers did not commit war crimes, and we know you don't have to any more than you need to state you don't eat babies or don't think you are the King of Mars.
Click to expand...

edited for accuracy.

you are are correct. I don't have to say I don't consider these soldiers to be war criminals, any more than I have to state I don't eat babies or I don't believe I am the King of Mars.

I am glad we could finally end this silly, petty, and childish discussion, and agree on what I do & don't have to say.

:)
 
Thunder said:
why would you think such a thing?
Click to expand...

Because you said it...The taliban was a recognized govt by some countries, but because we didn't recognize it, it was an illegal and illegitimate govt. If Thunder says it, it must be true...
 
ric27 said:
A serious question to all..


I've asked this question many times, including to lawyers: If we had Bin Laden in custody right now, of what crime could he be tried and convicted in a US Court?

Anyone?
Click to expand...

Conspiracy to commit murder, and contracting murder...among other things.
 
mac said:
Because you said it...The taliban was a recognized govt by some countries, but because we didn't recognize it, it was an illegal and illegitimate govt....
Click to expand...

if you're not recognized by the UN, and you're not recognized by the vast majority of nations around the world, then your legitimacy is certainly in question, if not totally null.
 
Thunder said:
if you're not recognized by the UN, and you're not recognized by the vast majority of nations around the world, then your legitimacy is certainly in question, if not totally null.
Click to expand...

China is a member of the UN. The reality is that no country need recognize a govt for it to be a govt.
 
Thunder said:
I know I'm smart, but I'm not THAT smart.

but thank you for the compliment, I appreciate it.
Click to expand...

If you were as smart as you claim, you'd realize it wasn't one.
 
mac said:
China is a member of the UN. The reality is that no country need recognize a govt for it to be a govt.
Click to expand...

yes I know that.

but if only three little nations in the world recognize the legitimacy of your govt., and every other nation says your bull**** and even the UN says your bull****, then you're bull**** and do not legally & legitimately represent that state.
 
Thunder said:
yes I know that.

but if only three little nations in the world recognize the legitimacy of your govt., and every other nation says your bull**** and even the UN says your bull****, then you're bull**** and do not legally & legitimately represent that state.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if only one govt recognizes it...and the UN doesn't rule the world.
 
mac said:
It doesn't matter if only one govt recognizes it...and the UN doesn't rule the world.
Click to expand...

The un is full of chit and we shouldve thrown them out of NYC years ago...they are a cesspool that we fill up with our money..
 
Thunder said:
edited for accuracy.

you are are correct. I don't have to say I don't consider these soldiers to be war criminals, any more than I have to state I don't eat babies or I don't believe I am the King of Mars.

I am glad we could finally end this silly, petty, and childish discussion, and agree on what I do & don't have to say.

:)
Click to expand...



Then why should we "condemn" them as you say, for taking pictures with dead savages you say we should "respect".


And you still refuse to say they are not wat criminals...

Very telling.
 
Thunder said:
I am more then happy to 100% declare, unequivocally, that the soldiers mentioned in the OP are not wat criminals.

:lamo
Click to expand...

Wat are you trying to say here, thunder?
 
Thunder said:
I am more then happy to 100% declare, unequivocally, that the soldiers mentioned in the OP are not wat criminals.

:lamo
Click to expand...


Unman so why should the Taliban who tried to kill them be "respected" and these non war criminal soldiers be "condemned"?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Unman so why should the Taliban who tried to kill them be "respected" and these non war criminal soldiers be "condemned"?
Click to expand...

seriously, I don't understand what you are asking me when you say these strange things.

I think we should respect the dead and not use their bodies for fun & games.

is that a problem for you?
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
seriously, I don't understand what you are asking me when you say these strange things.

I think we should respect the dead and not use their bodies for fun & games.

is that a problem for you?
Click to expand...

Did they(Taliban) respect the lives of those killed in their terrorist attacks? Where was there any regard for the lives and bodies of the victims in such attacks?
 
Marshall said:
Did they(Taliban) respect the lives of those killed in their terrorist attacks? Where was there any regard for the lives and bodies of the victims in such attacks?
Click to expand...

of course not.

that's why we are the good guys and they are the bad guys.

we are decent, moral, and just. while they are sadistic, cruel, and evil.
 
mac said:
Conspiracy to commit murder, and contracting murder...among other things.
Click to expand...

Hmmm....conspiracy? Thats what happens when one sees terrorism as a crime instead of an act of war. They truly believe that terrorism is a crime and trial and punishment is the way. They still don't understand that 9-11 was an act of war. They are still trying to figure out what we did to *cause* it.

Clinton himself said it, "We didn't have enough on him." I personally believe we still don't (Bin Laden was not a shooter or even a planner. His death is important only symbolically. Only)

Point is...you don't try and convict terrorists, you shoot them in their ****ing faces. You negotiate with their replacements before they murder women and children.
 
ric27 said:
...Point is...you don't try and convict terrorists, you shoot them in their ****ing faces. You negotiate with their replacements before they murder women and children.
Click to expand...

so much for innocent until proven guilty.

you gonna shoot American citizens in the head because you think they may be terrorists?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom