• 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

I consider collateral damage in a war for world hegemony to be terrorism, we just kill from further away with more sophisticated weapons.
To me, sacrificing human lives for oil to be more morally reprehensible than killing for revenge, or in defending your country from foreign invaders.

Well, for me, this invalidates your opinion about war and even foreign policy. You think the US is the same as Hamas and Taliban, except we are more tech advanced. You think the US is more morally reprehensible than terrorists, since they only kill for revenge and to defend themselves while the US kills for oil. You completely ignore that Saddam was a genocidal dictator with government rape rooms. FGM, honor killings and the rest being legal... you don't care. You only care about one thing, and that's the US being worse than terrorists. Your foreign policy understanding should be relegated to the CT section.

To label your position as sympathizing with terrorists would be an understatement.
 
Last edited:
Well, for me, this invalidates your opinion about war and even foreign policy. You think the US is the same as Hamas and Taliban, except we are more tech advanced. You think the US is more morally reprehensible than terrorists, since they only kill for revenge and to defend themselves while the US kills for oil. You completely ignore that Saddam was a genocidal dictator with government rape rooms. FGM, honor killings and the rest being legal... you don't care. You only care about one thing, and that's the US being worse than terrorists. Your foreign policy understanding should be relegated to the CT section.

To label your position as sympathizing with terrorists would be an understatement.

Nice strawman:


That's not even close to what I said.
 

Attachments

  • strawman2.jpg
    strawman2.jpg
    53.1 KB · Views: 20
It's exactly what you wrote. Read the bold parts again and think about it critically. You claimed that the US did the same as terrorists, just from farther away; even better, you went further - that killing for revenge and 'defending ones country' is morally superior to war for oil... That is very clearly claiming moral superiority for the terrorists.

You flat-out wrote that collateral damage is terrorism, but worse.

terrorism, we just kill from further away with more sophisticated weapons... To me, sacrificing human lives for oil to be more morally reprehensible

That's clear. Perhaps you are a strawman, but you should own your words.
 
It's exactly what you wrote. Read the bold parts again and think about it critically. You claimed that the US did the same as terrorists, just from farther away; even better, you went further - that killing for revenge and 'defending ones country' is morally superior to war for oil... That is very clearly claiming moral superiority for the terrorists.

You flat-out wrote that collateral damage is terrorism, but worse.



That's clear. Perhaps you are a strawman, but you should own your words.

You only put bold emphasis on the parts that fit your biased view of my position.

Here it is in context with bold emphasis on the parts you left out in your diatribe:

"I consider collateral damage in a war for world hegemony to be terrorism, we just kill from further away with more sophisticated weapons.
To me, sacrificing human lives for oil to be more morally reprehensible than killing for revenge, or in defending your country from foreign invaders.
 
Yeah, yeah... I get it. The US is in a war for world hegemony and sacrificing lives for oil. Your worldview is clear. Just to be sure:


Do you consider the victims of terrorism to be collateral damage in a war for world hegemony?

Is the US worse than terrorists, because the US does it for oil, whereas terrorists do it for "revenge" and nationalism?

Why do you leave out ideology as a vector, while including revenge/blowback and nationalism?
 
Yeah, yeah... I get it. The US is in a war for world hegemony and sacrificing lives for oil. Your worldview is clear.


Yeah, all the context that you prefer to ignore in the creation of your straw man. Got it!


Do you consider the victims of terrorism to be collateral damage in a war for world hegemony?

What exactly are you talking about? Are you speaking of the Iraqi civilians killed in our war on Iraq?

Is the US worse than terrorists, because the US does it for oil, whereas terrorists do it for "revenge" and nationalism?

I don't condone the killing of civilians no matter who's flag its done under. And yes moralistically, I consider killing to control another's property to be worse than killing for self defense, or to revenge a countrymen's deaths, such as when we killed Bin Laden.

Why do you leave out ideology as a vector, while including revenge/blowback and nationalism?

Because ideology has played a lesser role than revenge/blowback and nationalism.
 
This thread is STILL going on!? SHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTTT!

Update:

Two U.S. Marines were referred to trial by court martial over their alleged involvement in a video showing troops urinating on dead Taliban fighters and posing for pictures with casualties.
The U.S. Marine Corps announced the criminal charges Monday. The incident allegedly occurred in July 2011 in the Helmand Province of Afghanistan.
The charges are against Staff Sgt. Joseph W. Chamblin and Staff Sgt. Edward W. Deptola, both based at Camp Lejeune, N.C.
The two also were charged with other misconduct on the same day as the urination incident. That includes dereliction of duty by failing to properly supervise junior Marines and failing to stop and report misconduct of junior Marines.
Three other Marines were given administrative punishments last month for their role in the urination incident.


Read more: 2 Marines to be court-martialed over video showing troops urinating on corpses | Fox News

Sure took 'em long enough . . .
 
Update:



Sure took 'em long enough . . .

You can chop their heads off, but oh no! Don't you dare piss on'em!

This is rediculous political bull****.
 
You can chop their heads off, but oh no! Don't you dare piss on'em!

This is rediculous political bull****.

So you support actions like the urinating on others?
 
So you support actions like the urinating on others?

Well, I certainly don't. But I do understand that there are sometimes shocking--and also isolated--errors in judgment made by young soldiers at war.
 
The only problem that those marines et al face over there is having a camera.
 
No, that's not the only problem. In fact, it's not even a significant problem, IMO.
 
[SUB][/SUB]
So you support actions like the urinating on others?

I sure as hell don't support ruining the lives of a few people who are brave enough to serve thir country on a foreign battlefield, over nothing.
 
So you support actions like the urinating on others?

A little mental antagonism towards someone recently trying to kill you is completely reasonable. I don't think this issue should ever be tried. "Under duress" certainly applies here and you might still be a little hostile after your enemy is dead. This overt hostility is good in a war zone. All our soldiers are not priests/scholars/lawyers and will do stupid things on occasion. "Boys will be boys" fits here. Not court martial the bastards. I'm no different. I remember shooting a woodchuck when I was about 11 years old and taking a piss on the dead critter. What's the difference.
 
Yeah, yeah... I get it. The US is in a war for world hegemony and sacrificing lives for oil. Your worldview is clear. Just to be sure:


Do you consider the victims of terrorism to be collateral damage in a war for world hegemony?

Is the US worse than terrorists, because the US does it for oil, whereas terrorists do it for "revenge" and nationalism?

Why do you leave out ideology as a vector, while including revenge/blowback and nationalism?

Who are these terrorists you speak of that DO IT for revenge and nationalism?

And as you admit the USA is terrorising and slaughtering to access oil and profits

By your definition, any resistance to US hegemony is a noble fight for freedom

Or are you saying that there are only terrorists and dead civilians in this world?
 
Last edited:
[SUB][/SUB]

I sure as hell don't support ruining the lives of a few people who are brave enough to serve thir country on a foreign battlefield, over nothing.

And in committing rash and outright stupid acts like these they place in danger their fellow American soldiers and do a great disservice to their nation, its people and their service. Perhaps making some pay for their outright stupidity and foolishness will save the lives of Americans in the future by preventing these sorts of macho displays of juvenille stupidity.
 
A little mental antagonism towards someone recently trying to kill you is completely reasonable. I don't think this issue should ever be tried. "Under duress" certainly applies here and you might still be a little hostile after your enemy is dead. This overt hostility is good in a war zone. All our soldiers are not priests/scholars/lawyers and will do stupid things on occasion. "Boys will be boys" fits here. Not court martial the bastards. I'm no different. I remember shooting a woodchuck when I was about 11 years old and taking a piss on the dead critter. What's the difference.

My father served in World War II in eastern europe. He even spent parts of two years in a german prisoner of war camp. The damn Nazi's were not only trying to kill him - they were trying to destroy our very nation. He had more reasons than these current combatants to hate the enemy.

I asked him if he knew of any incidents of American troops urinating upon the enemy dead when he served and se said he never heard of such a thing.
 
And in committing rash and outright stupid acts like these they place in danger their fellow American soldiers and do a great disservice to their nation, its people and their service. Perhaps making some pay for their outright stupidity and foolishness will save the lives of Americans in the future by preventing these sorts of macho displays of juvenille stupidity.

They didn't put anyone in danger. That talking point is as idiotic as these criminal charges.
 
My father served in World War II in eastern europe. He even spent parts of two years in a german prisoner of war camp. The damn Nazi's were not only trying to kill him - they were trying to destroy our very nation. He had more reasons than these current combatants to hate the enemy.

I asked him if he knew of any incidents of American troops urinating upon the enemy dead when he served and se said he never heard of such a thing.

Your dad didn't hear of it, but it happened.
 
My father served in World War II in eastern europe. He even spent parts of two years in a german prisoner of war camp. The damn Nazi's were not only trying to kill him - they were trying to destroy our very nation. He had more reasons than these current combatants to hate the enemy.

I asked him if he knew of any incidents of American troops urinating upon the enemy dead when he served and se said he never heard of such a thing.

I believe that. Of course, you must remember that WWII was the last war we really fought to win. Everyone was too busy to be urinating on soldiers. Now, they need a break so they can read their ROE's. One-handed.
 
They didn't put anyone in danger. That talking point is as idiotic as these criminal charges.

And you know this how exactly?

And what is idiotic about expecting payback from the other side down the road?
 
Do you have any evidence of this for us to examine?

I think this picture quite poignantly shows the difference between WWII and all the other "wars" we've fought since:

Dog.jpg

THIS in contrast to a video someone put up a few weeks ago showing our guys throwing puppies off a cliff.
 
Back
Top Bottom