• 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!

U.S. Marines Urinate On Dead Bodies In Afghanistan

Allow me to refresh your memory of the infantry's mission. They probably didn't teach it at Fort Dix.



If pissing on a few stiffs can be a sub-task of that overall mission, then I'm not having a problem with it. I'm sure you're very aware that it's important to destroy enemy morale. Yes?

Pissing is no where in that mission. Defending pissing on bodies is rather weak.
 
Allow me to refresh your memory of the infantry's mission. They probably didn't teach it at Fort Dix.

If pissing on a few stiffs can be a sub-task of that overall mission, then I'm not having a problem with it. I'm sure you're very aware that it's important to destroy enemy morale. Yes?

And nowhere in that mission is to PISS on dead bodies. Even the Marine Corps Commandant denounces this act. Sorry, but in this case you are DEAD WRONG. You have an OPINION that it is ok, but that's all. The FACTS say differently.
 
See more and video @: U.S. Marines Urinate On Dead Bodies In Afghanistan (GRAPHIC VIDEO)Well this certainly will not help our cause. These soldiers need to be brought to justice ASAP. This makes my stomach just numb...

Thoughts?
Comments?
Response?
My Company's Executive Officer posted this as his Facebook Status a few hours ago. Nearly everyone in my unit has "liked" it already, with numberus comments of support for the Congressman.

*****
Congressman (Lt. Col. Ret.) Allen West, on the Marines urinating on dead Taliban: “I have sat back and assessed the incident with the video of our Marines urinating on Taliban corpses. I do not recall any self-righteous indignation when our Delta snipers Shugart and Gordon had their bodies dragged through Mogadishu. Neither do I recall media outrage and condemnation of our Blackwater security contractors being killed, their bodies burned, and hung from a bridge in Fallujah.

“All these over-emotional pundits and armchair quarterbacks need to chill. Does anyone remember the two Soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division who were beheaded and gutted in Iraq?

“The Marines were wrong. Give them a maximum punishment under field grade level Article 15 (non-judicial punishment), place a General Officer level letter of reprimand in their personnel file, and have them in full dress uniform stand before their Battalion, each personally apologize to God, Country, and Corps videotaped and conclude by singing the full US Marine Corps Hymn without a teleprompter.

“As for everyone else, unless you have been shot at by the Taliban, shut your mouth, war is hell.”
 
“The Marines were wrong. Give them a maximum punishment under field grade level Article 15 (non-judicial punishment), place a General Officer level letter of reprimand in their personnel file, and have them in full dress uniform stand before their Battalion, each personally apologize to God, Country, and Corps videotaped and conclude by singing the full US Marine Corps Hymn without a teleprompter.

An article 15 is what I have said these Marines should receive. That's all. They shouldn't be kicked out, however, there should be some sort of punishment. Any article 15 punishment under the descretion of the Marine Corp would be ok by me.

I will stand by that these Marines should not be kicked out. They made an error in judgment and as such an article 15 hearing would be good enough.
 
After all, those pesky extremists hate us for our freedoms and way of life and has nothing to do with our actions in their backyard.

And we all know. Pissing on bodies means bombing civilians... fair and square. Look, maybe developing world fundies (and even developed) cannot manage to keep perspective but I think we can. Let's not lower ourselves to their level by advocating murder as a response to immature nonsense.
 
ecofarm said:
Let's not lower ourselves to their level by advocating murder as a response to immature nonsense.

Identifying the causes for a response is not the same as justifying or advocating that response. Simply because one party is wrong does not mean the opposing party is right.
 
My Company's Executive Officer posted this as his Facebook Status a few hours ago. Nearly everyone in my unit has "liked" it already, with numberus comments of support for the Congressman.

*****
Congressman (Lt. Col. Ret.) Allen West, on the Marines urinating on dead Taliban: “I have sat back and assessed the incident with the video of our Marines urinating on Taliban corpses. I do not recall any self-righteous indignation when our Delta snipers Shugart and Gordon had their bodies dragged through Mogadishu. Neither do I recall media outrage and condemnation of our Blackwater security contractors being killed, their bodies burned, and hung from a bridge in Fallujah.”

Really? I remember a lot of media outrage. To the point where the Black Hawk Down incident was a major cause of our decision to pull out of Somalia. I seem to recall that Shugart and Gordon were awarded the Medal of Honor.
 
Really? I remember a lot of media outrage. To the point where the Black Hawk Down incident was a major cause of our decision to pull out of Somalia. I seem to recall that Shugart and Gordon were awarded the Medal of Honor.

For some reason the outrage never seems to be enough. And I actually understand that. But it is true there was outrage to those things.

It is also important to note that those who committed that outrage did not represent us or this nation. That difference matters as well.
 
Really? I remember a lot of media outrage. To the point where the Black Hawk Down incident was a major cause of our decision to pull out of Somalia. I seem to recall that Shugart and Gordon were awarded the Medal of Honor.

All I ever saw were a bunch of liberals crying about how we provoked it and we deserved it and it's all Bush's fault.
 
All I ever saw were a bunch of liberals crying about how we provoked it and we deserved it and it's all Bush's fault.


well they did provoke it....
 
All I ever saw were a bunch of liberals crying about how we provoked it and we deserved it and it's all Bush's fault.

Your obvious visual handicap is not germane to the present debate.
 
All I ever saw were a bunch of liberals crying about how we provoked it and we deserved it and it's all Bush's fault.

Bush wasn't even President at the time. My recollection is that people were very very angry at and disgusted by the Somalis.
 
All I ever saw were a bunch of liberals crying about how we provoked it and we deserved it and it's all Bush's fault.

If that's all you remember, it reminds us how faulty memory can be.
 
What is meaningful criticism? And do you think that non-military people can meaningfully criticize the actions described in the OP?

If you dont know what meaningful criticism is then nothing anyone says is going to make a lick of sense to you. You can criticize anyone in the world, but only meaningful criticism is going to actually help that person. Anything else only proves to make the person doing the critisicism feel superior.
And no, i dont think that non-military people can meaningfully criticize the actions described in the OP.
 
One thing is forever certain. The left and the enemies of democracy will be using this against the American people to justify further acts of terrorism.

Yet when Americans, Australians, Brits, Nigerians or Canadians die at the hands of terrorists, it doesn't matter what their political persuasions might have been.
 
One thing is forever certain. The left and the enemies of democracy will be using this against the American people to justify further acts of terrorism.

I love your generalizations. I am part of the left as are many on this board and only a HANDFUL have used it. I love how you try to lump us in with enemies of democracy. Your comments are pathetic and easily dismissed as foaming at the mouth, head up ass rhetoric.
 
I love your generalizations. I am part of the left as are many on this board and only a HANDFUL have used it. I love how you try to lump us in with enemies of democracy. Your comments are pathetic and easily dismissed as foaming at the mouth, head up ass rhetoric.

The Left speaks.
 
If you dont know what meaningful criticism is then nothing anyone says is going to make a lick of sense to you. You can criticize anyone in the world, but only meaningful criticism is going to actually help that person. Anything else only proves to make the person doing the critisicism feel superior.
And no, i dont think that non-military people can meaningfully criticize the actions described in the OP.
"Meaningful" is a vague and subjective word. For one person, any criticism might be meaningful. For another person, only soldiers' criticism is meaningful. For another, anyone who is familiar with the effects of war on the human psyche is able to provide meaningful criticism. That's why I asked you - to figure out what it means to you. There's no need to be rude about a legitimate question.

In any case, you don't think non-military people can meaningfully criticize their actions. I disagree just like I would disagree with anyone that says non-Presidents can meaningfully criticize Obama. I frankly think it's a stupid, anti-intellectual and illogical position used to dismiss different opinions that one would rather not confront.
 
This is pretty much the deal. Sure, the incident is bad form and I hope the guys get their proper punishment, But let's not get all "the US is like the Taliban". For one, when we discover such things, we prosecute them. Every society has criminals, including the military. For two, it's pissing on someone's grave - let's not lose our heads over it.

Big deal. They'll get punished.

If we all had reasonable minds... that would be that and we would move on to actual problems worth getting truly upset about.
 
Identifying the causes for a response is not the same as justifying or advocating that response. Simply because one party is wrong does not mean the opposing party is right.

well they did provoke it....

Those two posts are exactly what the next is referring to:

One thing is forever certain. The left and the enemies of democracy will be using this against the American people to justify further acts of terrorism.


You see, TNAR and Higgins are all about the "but we caused it!". They are blaming the US for the actions of the Taliban. Yet, when the Marines do something uncooth... do we hear the same? Are they all "well, the Taliban caused it!". No, we don't. The blame is all one-way, and all lands at the feet of the US. This is why Grant is correct in proposing that many will use the indicent to JUSTIFY the actions of the Taliban. There's a difference between justification and "finding the reasons", and when the reasons land at our feet (that is, when one blames others for their actions) it is called justification. It's no different than blaming the woman for domestic violence... "she provoked it!!"

There is no justification for Terrorism. It cannot be blamed on others. If it could be blamed on others... then why don't WE do it too.
 
Last edited:
I am not going to speak on the actions of the marines from a personal perspective, I think in war people do things they wouldn't otherwise do and why this comes as a surprise or as a shock to anyone is beyond me.

Now I understand on the far right, there is this notion that Obama hates the military or something... and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's comments on this incident will only rienforce that view. But the fact is the mission comes first, 10 years of bloody conflict cannot be undone by one incident, the President and the Secretary of State have no choice but to salvage the mission as best they can, they have no choice but to say what they said and that's the end of it.

And as for you Grant, your generalizations and hysterical paranoia are as usual extremely entertaining.
 
Those two posts are exactly what the next is referring to:




You see, TNAR and Higgins are all about the "but we caused it!". They are blaming the US for the actions of the Taliban. Yet, when the Marines do something uncooth... do we hear the same? Are they all "well, the Taliban caused it!". No, we don't. The blame is all one-way, and all lands at the feet of the US. This is why Grant is correct in proposing that many will use the indicent to JUSTIFY the actions of the Taliban. There's a difference between justification and "finding the reasons", and when the reasons land at our feet (that is, when one blames others for their actions) it is called justification. It's no different than blaming the woman for domestic violence... "she provoked it!!"

There is no justification for Terrorism. It cannot be blamed on others. If it could be blamed on others... then why don't WE do it too.

I'm sorry eco...but is it just me or do other people see the irony in this statement?
 
ecofarm

There is no justification for Terrorism. It cannot be blamed on others. If it could be blamed on others... then why don't WE do it too.

People make excuses for terrorism and it goes on all the time. What happened at Abu Ghraib was another incident that was used against the United States despite no deaths occurring, while tortures and actual deaths of innocent people received far less publicity.

Pissing on the corpse of a dead terrorist might in bad taste but they deserve no better. In fact every consideration should be made to make such an act government policy.

Obama's Pastor: God Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11 - ABC News

The Commentator - The BBC embarrasses Britain during the "9/11" Question Time... again
 
"Meaningful" is a vague and subjective word. For one person, any criticism might be meaningful. For another person, only soldiers' criticism is meaningful. For another, anyone who is familiar with the effects of war on the human psyche is able to provide meaningful criticism. That's why I asked you - to figure out what it means to you. There's no need to be rude about a legitimate question.

In any case, you don't think non-military people can meaningfully criticize their actions. I disagree just like I would disagree with anyone that says non-Presidents can meaningfully criticize Obama. I frankly think it's a stupid, anti-intellectual and illogical position used to dismiss different opinions that one would rather not confront.

Your incessant comparison between the President and a military soldier makes my point.

mean·ing·ful   /ˈminɪŋfəl/ Show Spelled[mee-ning-fuhl] Show IPA
adjective
full of meaning, significance, purpose, or value; purposeful; significant: a meaningful wink; a meaningful choice.
Meaningful | Define Meaningful at Dictionary.com

Meaningful criticism is something that has value to the person being criticized. You can write a letter to the President and completely rip him up one side and down the other, but that doesnt mean that anything you say will be meaningful to him. He will know that since you weren’t there when he made his decisions, you cant know what went in to the process. The same can be said about the soldiers in this story. You can tell them how stupid you think their actions were, but i doubt anything you say will make them feel any differently since in their minds, you cannot understand what went through their minds that caused them to make the decisions they did.

Your criticism obviously has meaning to you, but why do you think it has meaning to them?
 
Your incessant comparison between the President and a military soldier makes my point.

mean·ing·ful   /ˈminɪŋfəl/ Show Spelled[mee-ning-fuhl] Show IPA
adjective
full of meaning, significance, purpose, or value; purposeful; significant: a meaningful wink; a meaningful choice.
Meaningful | Define Meaningful at Dictionary.com

Meaningful criticism is something that has value to the person being criticized. You can write a letter to the President and completely rip him up one side and down the other, but that doesnt mean that anything you say will be meaningful to him. He will know that since you weren’t there when he made his decisions, you cant know what went in to the process. The same can be said about the soldiers in this story. You can tell them how stupid you think their actions were, but i doubt anything you say will make them feel any differently since in their minds, you cannot understand what went through their minds that caused them to make the decisions they did.

Your criticism obviously has meaning to you, but why do you think it has meaning to them?
Okay, but my question wasn't directed at the soldiers. It was directed AT YOU. What is meaningful criticism TO YOU? What does criticism have to have in order to have value for YOU? To me, meaningful criticism is criticism that is based in knowledge or understanding of the topic at hand. To you, it seems the meaningful criticism is based in direct experience with the topic at hand. I am correct?
 
Back
Top Bottom