• 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

There is a difference between taking it to the enemy and literally pissing on them. The act these Marines committed has nothing to do with being tough on the enemy. Yes war is immoral, innocent people will inevitably die, tragedy will happen, children will be killed as you point out. However there is a difference between leveling a house a terrorist is shooting at you from, and killing a child inside that building, and pissing on the bodies of the dead. Defeating the enemy is part of the mission, pissing on their bodies does not help that mission. Part of the mission is convincing the citizens of that country not to take up arms against us, pissing on them is not part of it. If you destroy a building and inadvertently kill a child, you didn't destroy the building to kill the child you did it to defeat the enemy inside, to save the lives of your comrades who were under fire. What does pissing on a body accomplish? It has no positive affect on you, only negative consequences can follow. THAT is the critical difference you need to realize.


wow.....


do officers really believe that?


no wonder you people get no respect when you're young....



I would recommend to you On Killing as a start-point for this discussion. Grunts need to be able to convince themselves of a couple of key points: 1. the people they are killing aren't really people and 2. they are far superior to them in aggression, strength, ability, aggression, deadliness, aggression, etc. Our problem was the li'l bastards kept grabbing their wounded and dead before we could get to them - the first time we overwhelmed their position fast enough that we got to keep the bodies, our gunny strapped them to the front of one of the gun truck like deer and rode around the fob straddling them and whooping warcries. The ingrained moral is obvious, looking back - killing the enemy is a good thing and worthy of celebration.

(everyone getting hyperventilating moral fits about that last bit is free to hit the yellow footprints on an infantry contract.)

now - agreed this is an IO loss, and potentially a strategic level hit. that's why you never video or photo this kind of stuff. stupid. and so obviously these guys have to go down. but let's not wrap ourselves up in sanctimony here.
 
When I got home yesterday and saw hillary on the news bashing these guys I blew a fuse. She has no idea what they have been through, if she did she would have defended them not threatened them. THIS is a perfect example of why this current administration must be swept out of power and cast off into the trash heap of history. Four more years of these clowns and we are doomed.
 
what I am curious about is why these guys are somehow nazi death camps like times a million, but the "kill squad" stories so quickly disappeared. was it too early in the Obama administration for the press to be willing to embarrass him?
 
Re: pee party

I think I'm more bothered by the fact that they cut the heads off our dead soldiers... and the occasional live one... then drag their bodies naked through the streets or hang them from an overpass. I think the soldiers' families would agree with me. Don't manufacture outrage about something that adolescent males have been doing to other adolescent males since frat houses were invented.

Here's the problem --- this sort of behavior fits very nicely with the cuts being proposed in the military. I fear it will be used as yet another bludgeon to push those cuts. I'm not saying the Military couldn't use cuts - they could. I'm just saying using this incident, blowing it way out of proportion and now having Hillary and the White House get in on the act only tells me this minor incident will become the proverbial mountain out of a mole hill, these 4 guys will get the worst punishment the military can throw at them, and the incident will be the poster child for gutting the military. Ain't politics grand?
 
High praise that - The US is no worse than the Taliban! Can I get an Amen!

The excuse that this incident will incent the Taliban to reciprocate is ludicrous - which is what my statement meant and which clearly went over your head.
 
This is such arbitrary flame throwing to generate friction between waring factions of ideology. Please tell me this is worse than slashing living people's throats? get real.
 
When I got home yesterday and saw hillary on the news bashing these guys I blew a fuse. She has no idea what they have been through, if she did she would have defended them not threatened them. THIS is a perfect example of why this current administration must be swept out of power and cast off into the trash heap of history. Four more years of these clowns and we are doomed.

I'm curious your views on these arguments then.

When Abu Ghrab instance took place soldiers saw a spike in violence and the military believes it was in response to the incidents and images that came from there.

The other is we are the for a counter insurgency which means winning over the people. Desecrating a body a huge deal in that culture. It's hard to win over "hearts and minds" when stuff like this comes out. Everyday soldiers are nice to these people...but an image of someone urinating on dead bodies can be shown everywhere 24/7. It undoes a lot of hard work.
 
wow.....

do officers really believe that?

no wonder you people get no respect when you're young....

I would recommend to you On Killing as a start-point for this discussion. Grunts need to be able to convince themselves of a couple of key points: 1. the people they are killing aren't really people and 2. they are far superior to them in aggression, strength, ability, aggression, deadliness, aggression, etc. Our problem was the li'l bastards kept grabbing their wounded and dead before we could get to them - the first time we overwhelmed their position fast enough that we got to keep the bodies, our gunny strapped them to the front of one of the gun truck like deer and rode around the fob straddling them and whooping warcries. The ingrained moral is obvious, looking back - killing the enemy is a good thing and worthy of celebration.

(everyone getting hyperventilating moral fits about that last bit is free to hit the yellow footprints on an infantry contract.)

now - agreed this is an IO loss, and potentially a strategic level hit. that's why you never video or photo this kind of stuff. stupid. and so obviously these guys have to go down. but let's not wrap ourselves up in sanctimony here.

I'll meet you half way, filming it was a ridiculously stupid decision. And I hope they weren't so stupid as to post it themselves to Youtube. And I agree a victory is a worthy event to celebrate, although how you do it is critical.

Now yes as an officer I'm often shielded from the perspective of that man on the absolute front line, sending lead, receiving lead, taking the fight to the enemy and engaging him in close combat. I do try as I can to get myself out there as much as I can, I'm obviously not in Afghanistan and there's no lead being slung in Korea so I can't claim combat experience. However I do try to involve myself in the daily lives of the Soldiers within my Platoon, not because I'm a micro-manger but because I want to know what's going on. Out here in Korea I personally lead missions, again its not the same as combat at all, but I do have an understanding of the frustrations my Soldiers go through while on mission. I'm part of a truck company so our missions always involve driving, out here on Korean roads I'm sure you remember is completely insane and trying to maneuver a massive truck makes it all the worse. But since I'm out there they can talk to me about their frustrations with their equipment, the missions, whatever else, and I can understand and talk in the same language because I see it.

Now I brought all that up not because I'm saying I know what the stresses of combat are like because I lead convoys in Korea, I brought it up to acknowledge your point that officers are often detached and truly don't understand their Soldiers and let you know I do what I can about it.

However, just because I understand their frustrations doesn't mean I have to accept their wrongful actions that may come from them. If I saw a group of my Soldiers pissing on some Taliban, and it was only me, I'd immediately put a stop to it. Not only for all the reasons I mentioned about what happens if it gets out, but because something is wrong and it needs to be corrected. I would see it as a sign that the stresses and horrors of this place have seriously gotten to these Soldiers and they need help and its my job to make sure they get it. Chaplain, psychological help, something has to be done because its not normal behavior to do something like this.

I know the military, given personnel and mission needs, have sometimes turned a blind eye towards Soldier stress or trauma. I could see myself telling my CO, these guys need to be taken off for a few days(although not saying exactly what they did) and having it shot down because we really need the people. And if that was the case they'd have my special attention along with their NCO, who would know about it and I'd expect an extra cautious eye on them too.

And why do I do it? Not only for the mission, I've made that clear. I also would do it for the Soldiers themselves they deserve to have someone watching their back when it comes to issues like this, and its important to brief your Soldiers or help them understand better what stress looks like in another way so they can watch their buddies. NCO involvement is obviously critical too. That is leadership responsibility, those men deserve someone to look after their mental well being just as much as their physical. Their buddies deserve to not work in an AO where something like that just happened, and now are facing even more pissed off Taliban. The Soldiers deserve to not have their lives ruined because of a single stupid incident. The Soldiers who sacrificed, whether their health, marriage, mental well being, or their lives deserve that mission to be accomplished so it was not in vain.

All those reasons are why I have my opinion, and wouldn't tolerate this in the slightest. And if it did get out of my control and a video was posted to Youtube, what can I do besides follow the rules and regulations? At that point, its out of the PL's hand's there's nothing more I can do besides speak for their behalf, and if the investigators have the same opinion as I do about the role of leadership its probably my ass in deep **** too.
 
I'm curious your views on these arguments then.

When Abu Ghrab instance took place soldiers saw a spike in violence and the military believes it was in response to the incidents and images that came from there.

The other is we are the for a counter insurgency which means winning over the people. Desecrating a body a huge deal in that culture. It's hard to win over "hearts and minds" when stuff like this comes out. Everyday soldiers are nice to these people...but an image of someone urinating on dead bodies can be shown everywhere 24/7. It undoes a lot of hard work.

We are not there to win over people, we are there so those people can make their own choices, supposedly. But with Hillary and those ideologues governing reality the way they do, this is pure inflamatory propaganda to get the leaders of each side back in control of their sides.

Reality is mind over matter. You better mind or your body doesn't matter to the ruling class.
 
We are not there to win over people, we are there so those people can make their own choices, supposedly.

We are there to win them over to the idea that they should let each other make their own choices.
 
We are there to win them over to the idea that they should let each other make their own choices.

Funny, that is what I said and you redifine me as not saying it. thanks.
 
When I got home yesterday and saw hillary on the news bashing these guys I blew a fuse. She has no idea what they have been through, if she did she would have defended them not threatened them.

Oh, bull****. You just don't like Hillary. Here, is this better?

The Marine Corps’ top general has condemned a web video appearing to show Marines in Afghanistan urinating on dead Taliban fighters, and called for criminal and internal probes into what has quickly mushroomed into an international incident that threatens to undermine the U.S war effort.

“The behavior depicted in the video is wholly inconsistent with the high standards of conduct and warrior ethos that we have demonstrated throughout our history,” Gen. Jim Amos, the Marine Corps commandant, said in a statement issued Thursday morning. “Accordingly, late yesterday I requested that the Naval Criminal Investigative Service pull together a team of their very best agents and immediately assign them responsibility to thoroughly investigate every aspect of the filmed event.”What they did was not defensible.
 
Funny, that is what I said and you redifine me as not saying it. thanks.

I didn't redefine anything. I said what I said, and if it agrees with what you said, consider it my attempt to restate it so others may understand better.
 
We are not there to win over people, we are there so those people can make their own choices, supposedly. But with Hillary and those ideologues governing reality the way they do, this is pure inflamatory propaganda to get the leaders of each side back in control of their sides.

We are there to win over the people...that's how you fight a counter insurgency. You need intel...from the people. They will give you intel if you are the "good guys" not if you're pissing on dead Muslims. That is why Gen Petraeus was so successful in Iraq...he worked with civilians to root out insurgents. Yes were there to provide stability and set up a government so we can get the hell out but in order to do that...you need to fight a counter insurgency war...that includes winning over the people.
 
I didn't redefine anything. I said what I said, and if it agrees with what you said, consider it my attempt to restate it so others may understand better.

Oh, your way or the highway. again thanks.

Now redefine mind over matter so everyone has a better idea of what that meant in real results over reality's defining of character matters, please?
 
Oh, your way or the highway. again thanks.

Now redefine mind over matter so everyone has a better idea of what that meant in real results over reality's defining of character matters, please?

What the hell are you talking about? Is your blood sugar dropping or something? Seriously, your comments don't follow.
 
What the hell are you talking about? Is your blood sugar dropping or something? Seriously, your comments don't follow.

I am talking about the politics behind this symbolic story of soldiers urinating upon the bodies of those trying to kill them.
 
All those arguements does not hold any water. Put yourselves in their shoes - the Taliban urinating on the dead bodies of american soldiers.

Two Marines in urination video interviewed

Officials in the United States and Afghanistan expressed shock and outrage regarding the video."I have seen the footage, and I find the behavior depicted in it utterly deplorable," U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said in a statement. "I condemn it in the strongest possible terms."

Two Marines in urination video interviewed - CNN.com
 
All those arguements does not hold any water. Put yourselves in their shoes - the Taliban urinating on the dead bodies of american soldiers.

Two Marines in urination video interviewed

Picking sides of this issue is exactly why this story is in the news. Beware, which side as all function in governance the same way vernacularly defined separately in hopes nobody knows what is really going on socially as a whole population of humans haven't a clue to their true selves.

by design within the rule of law to each society character has more value than surviving characteristics.
 
Last edited:
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?


I know, poor taliban, whom that asshole biden says "isn't our enemy".... These savages, behead, torture, maim our soldiers and you want these soldiers brought to "justice"?

What "justice" should be metered out. I can see article 15's but that's it.


None of those under me would have done this, but to act all pc about it, to me seems, naive at best.


“There were young knights among them who had never been present at a stricken field. Some could not look upon it and some could not speak and they held themselves apart from the others who were cutting down the prisoners at My Lord’s orders, for the prisoners were a body too numerous to be guarded by those of us who were left. Then Jean de Rye, an aged knight of Burgundy who had been sore wounded in the battle, rode up to the group of young knights and said: ‘Are ye maidens with your downcast eyes? Look well upon it. See all of it. Close your eyes to nothing. For a battle is fought to be won. And it is this that happens if you lose.”
- Froissart’s Chronicles, 14th century
 
All those arguements does not hold any water. Put yourselves in their shoes - the Taliban urinating on the dead bodies of american soldiers.

Two Marines in urination video interviewed

I would venture to guess that very few people would be outraged at the "desecration" of American soldiers in this way. Please notice any Google search asking for "Afghanistan atrocities," as an example. Nothing comes up about our enemies. Scores come up about our troops. Don't think there are any by the other side? I've got this bridge...

Where is the media? Oh, wait. We don't want to turn this into an more unpopular war, do we??
 
I would venture to guess that very few people would be outraged at the "desecration" of American soldiers in this way. Please notice any Google search asking for "Afghanistan atrocities," as an example. Nothing comes up about our enemies. Scores come up about our troops. Don't think there are any by the other side? I've got this bridge...

Where is the media? Oh, wait. We don't want to turn this into an more unpopular war, do we??

While a completely different scenario dealing with the same kind of results, anyone remember Black Hawk down? What did the other side do to the america pilot following orders from the political side of our reality.
this is the same semantic as was done with Casey Anthony on the home front. Same game rules to social engineering civilization for the rights of the plural minority to rule the majority of defined collective thought.

MaggieD, the media is doing as told exactly how to tell it.
 
Last edited:
This is a good read
The biology of politics: Liberals roll with the good, conservatives confront the bad

A new study from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln suggests there are biological truths to such broad brushstrokes.

In a series of experiments, researchers closely monitored physiological reactions and eye movements of study participants when shown combinations of both pleasant and unpleasant images. Conservatives reacted more strongly to, fixated more quickly on, and looked longer at the unpleasant images; liberals had stronger reactions to and looked longer at the pleasant images compared with conservatives.

"It's been said that conservatives and liberals don't see things in the same way," said Mike Dodd, UNL assistant professor of psychology and the study's lead author. "These findings make that clear – quite literally."

To gauge participants' physiological responses, they were shown a series of images on a screen. Electrodes measured subtle skin conductance changes, which indicated an emotional response. The cognitive data, meanwhile, was gathered by outfitting participants with eyetracking equipment that captured even the most subtle of eye movements while combinations of unpleasant and pleasant photos appeared on the screen.

While liberals' gazes tended to fall upon the pleasant images, such as a beach ball or a bunny rabbit, conservatives clearly focused on the negative images – of an open wound, a crashed car or a dirty toilet, for example.

Consistent with the idea that conservatives seem to respond more to negative stimuli while liberals respond more to positive stimuli, conservatives also exhibited a stronger physiological response to images of Democratic politicians – presumed to be a negative to them – than they did on pictures of well-known Republicans. Liberals, on the other hand, had a stronger physiological response to the Democrats – presumed to be a positive stimulus to them – than they did to images of the Republicans.
 
I would venture to guess that very few people would be outraged at the "desecration" of American soldiers in this way. Please notice any Google search asking for "Afghanistan atrocities," as an example. Nothing comes up about our enemies.

That's because you don't know what you're talking about. Try "taliban atrocities". Duh.
 
I would venture to guess that very few people would be outraged at the "desecration" of American soldiers in this way.

You can't be serious about that either.
 
Back
Top Bottom