• 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!

Rick Perry Defends Marines Who Urinated On Corpses

Catawba said:
I had no higher expectations of Perry, so I cannot say that I am at all surprised.
Click to expand...


not a big fan of Perry but im also not as fan of throwing these guys under the bus like Clinton did
 
Andalublue said:
Doesn't their basic training include any instruction on how a marine is expected to behave towards the bodies of dead enemy combatants? Seems like the failure lies a little further up the chain of command.
Click to expand...

When I went to basic training in Fort Benning Ga to be an infantry soldier they did not teach us anything about respecting dead bodies. They gave you an idea on how to inspect a dead body to make sure they are no booby traps and to look for intel, but there was never any you can't defile dead bodies of enemy combatants. I imagine that actual marine infantrymen (No I do not buy that lie that every marine is a infantry man seeing how POGs and grunts in the marines have different training) basic training is no different than Army infantry basic training in that regard.
 
Viktyr Korimir said:
See? This is why I don't want to cut those Marines too much slack.
Click to expand...


Neither do I, and I think the embarrassment of being publicly identified for their actions will go a long ways in addition to the punishment by the Marines for the dishonor this brings on them.

This is something they will have to live down for the rest of their lives.
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
Hows that?
Click to expand...


these guys did somethign wrong and should be punished but its a military matter, a Politician like Clinton who has never served in the military has no place hanging these guys out to dry
 
Higgins86 said:
these guys did somethign wrong and should be punished but its a military matter, a Politician like Clinton who has never served in the military has no place hanging these guys out to dry
Click to expand...

I think he's asking who did Clinton hang out to dry?
 
Higgins86 said:
these guys did somethign wrong and should be punished but its a military matter, a Politician like Clinton who has never served in the military has no place hanging these guys out to dry
Click to expand...

What these guys did is so wrong, it dishonors the US, and especially the military, in the eyes of the world that we are militarily occupying and our allies. The Secretary of State has a duty to try to restore that honor by showing this behavior is condemned from the top down.
 
Catawba said:
What these guys did is so wrong, it dishonors the US, and especially the military, in the eyes of the world that we are militarily occupying and our allies. The Secretary of State has a duty to try to restore that honor by showing this behavior is condemned from the top down.
Click to expand...


it is it not the Secretary of State responsibility to interfere with military matters and it is not for her to sugget any kind of punishment they should receive. I'm not disagreeing with you that what they did was wrong but neither of us know what their mental state was when the video was taken, what their unit had been through and what kind of support they were getting from their Officers and punishment should be internal and kept private, America does not owe the Taliban an apology nor does it owe it an explanation.
 
apdst said:
In a word...no.

I spent 12 years in the Army, as an infantryman--one of the very soldiers that needed to know those kinds of regulations the most--and I was in the service for about 8 years before I was ever exposed to anything that might remotely come close to suggesting that pissing on a dead enemy might even sorta be a violation of any rule, regulation, or order.

Now, was I educated on how to treat a live enemy? i.e. a POW? Hell yes! But, dead enemies? No, not really too much at all.
Click to expand...


They didn't tell us we couldn't masturbate sitting in front of the barracks either but it was just kind of sorta understood.
Am certain these young marines would all agree that was a dumbass act to videotape.

Many may disagree with me but I think you are given more leniency to such acts on an enemy killed on your own land than when you are a guest in someone else's land.
 
Last edited:
Crosscheck said:
They didn't tell us we couldn't masturbate sitting in front of the barracks either but it was just kind of sorta understood.
Am certain these young marines would all agree that was a dumbass act to videotape.

Many may disagree with me but I think you are given more leniency to such acts on an enemy killed on your own land than when you are a guest in someone else's land.
Click to expand...


guests? Wow I think someone missed the memo in that case
 
Higgins86 said:
it is it not the Secretary of State responsibility to interfere with military matters and it is not for her to sugget any kind of punishment they should receive. I'm not disagreeing with you that what they did was wrong but neither of us know what their mental state was when the video was taken, what their unit had been through and what kind of support they were getting from their Officers and punishment should be internal and kept private, America does not owe the Taliban an apology nor does it owe it an explanation.
Click to expand...

Its not about respect for the Taliban, it is about respect for the the people of Afghanistan whom we have been trying to convince for the last decade that we are held to a higher moral standard than the Taliban. Not to mention dishonor we show to our allies who we rely on for support.

Condemning the actions as dishonorable and calling for the maximum punishment under the law, is the least that would be expected from our leaders. And that does not interfere in any way with the military process in this matter.
 
Catawba said:
Its not about respect for the Taliban, it is about respect for the the people of Afghanistan whom we have been trying to convince for the last decade that we are held to a higher moral standard than the Taliban. Not to mention dishonor we show to our allies who we rely on for support.

Condemning the actions as dishonorable and calling for the maximum punishment under the law, is the least that would be expected from our leaders. And that does not interfere in any way with the military process in this matter.
Click to expand...


and what law would that be? Would it not be Military law?
 
Higgins86 said:
and what law would that be? Would it not be Military law?
Click to expand...

The military operates under a civilian commander. Military law is a subset of US law. How has Clinton interfered with the case?
 
Catawba said:
The military operates under a civilian commander. Military law is a subset of US law. How has Clinton interfered with the case?
Click to expand...


I just thought her comments were a little rash and a little bit weak, seemed to me they were more worried about this "peace deal" with the taliban than they were about the actual video.
 
Higgins86 said:
I just thought her comments were a little rash and a little bit weak, seemed to me they were more worried about this "peace deal" with the taliban than they were about the actual video.
Click to expand...

They are worried about the effect this might have our our decade long investment in Afghanistan, and our future credibility around the world as a force for "good."
 
Higgins86 said:
these guys did somethign wrong and should be punished but its a military matter, a Politician like Clinton who has never served in the military has no place hanging these guys out to dry
Click to expand...

Why put it all on Clinton, unless it is to turn this issue into one of political hackery? 2 members of a band I used to play for were almost killed by the VA, and that was during the Bush administration. However, I also blame Clinton, and I also blame Obama. ALL of our presidents after Reagan have had little or no regard for our troops, or for our vets. Democrats? Republicans? They are both to blame.
 
Higgins86 said:
well given the subject matter I would of thought that was pretty obvious!
Click to expand...

I think your diversion has run its course. It's clear you have nothing. So, moving on.

:coffeepap
 
Viktyr Korimir said:
I'm sorry, but what about the thousands of men who have also risked-- and in some cases, given-- their lives in service to our country, and still managed to uphold the honor of the uniform and the values of our people? I would think that anyone who has served this country with honor, especially in dangerous and stressful situations like these Marines have, would be insulted if we cut these Marines too much slack because we "understand" what they did.
Click to expand...

Insulted? No. Scratching their heads wondering, "Are you serious?", yes.

To me, that says that we don't expect better of our servicemen than this, which is almost as insulting to our military personnel as the filth that comes out of the war protesters' mouths.

All of the veterans I know in real life are disgusted by this. The only people I've met who don't have a problem with it have been civilians and people on the internet whose claims of military service I can only take at face value.
Click to expand...

The only thing that is expected of our servicemen is to do their job and destroy the enemy. Afterall, that's their job.
 
Crosscheck said:
They didn't tell us we couldn't masturbate sitting in front of the barracks either but it was just kind of sorta understood.
Am certain these young marines would all agree that was a dumbass act to videotape.

Many may disagree with me but I think you are given more leniency to such acts on an enemy killed on your own land than when you are a guest in someone else's land.
Click to expand...

They didn't? I was told, very specifically, that public exposure was against the rules. It would mean that you're, "out of uniform". Recall that regulation?

I mean, let's face it; these guys didn't commit a friggin crime.

This rates a level 10 ass chewing and nothing more.
 
Boo Radley said:
I think your diversion has run its course. It's clear you have nothing. So, moving on.

:coffeepap
Click to expand...


Well no you just dont agree with me, which does not shock me based on your previous posts that I have read but whatever.
 
apdst said:
The only thing that is expected of our servicemen is to do their job and destroy the enemy. Afterall, that's their job.
Click to expand...

That is not true. That is a filthy and disgusting lie and everyone who has served knows it-- including yourself, if I remember correctly that you are a veteran.
 
apdst said:
The only thing that is expected of our servicemen is to do their job and destroy the enemy.
Click to expand...

False. We expect much much more than that.

Their job is also to not dishonor the military or their country, among other things.
 
apdst said:
I mean, let's face it; these guys didn't commit a friggin crime.
Click to expand...

You sure?

This rates a level 10 ass chewing and nothing more.
Click to expand...

If someone went out an peed on a U.S. soldier's grave in Arlington, what would you think of that? Just curious.
 
Viktyr Korimir said:
That is not true. That is a filthy and disgusting lie and everyone who has served knows it-- including yourself, if I remember correctly that you are a veteran.
Click to expand...

It's very true. I've posted the infantry's mission in this thread and it explains about killing the enemy, not doing PR.

War is ungly and armies aren't public relations tools.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom