• 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!

Court Reverses Conviction Of Marine Sniper Who Urinated On Dead Taliban

Being good sports isn't going to extinguish the fire. Violence and intimidation will.

Yea. It worked so well in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Middle East as a whole. Oh wait. It hasn't.
 
The second post of the damn thread...



This ignorant and immediate follow up to apdst's original post set the tone that these military (and civilian) yahoos have been following ever since.

- Pissing on corpses is fine as long as you don't get caught,
- Pissing on corpses is fine as long as it is a terrorist,
- Pissing on corpses is wrong but people have been pissing on corpses since the Revolutionary War so who cares,
- And so on.
I agree only with the highlighted item.

Terrorists are so morally subhuman that their corpses deserve only the lowest disrespect.

And it is from here that such attitudes claimed authenticity and authority over my assertion that it is not about the corpse.
It is about the corpse if it is a terrorist's corpse.

The act is inappropriate, it is unprofessional, and it is unbecoming of a Marine in the face of the enemy. And to blast it on YouTube and to dare every Marine leader and the Corps itself to have to deal with it shows how little three NCOs and two SNCOs felt about maintaining their discipline. The denigration of who I am from those who declared their "understanding " of war and combat began. Of course, then I found out later from them that they don't have a damn clue what they are talking about, so no wonder why their ideals of professionalism and appropriate behavior in war/combat are askewed.
Well, since you are so upset about it maybe we should try something else. How about giving the corpse a nice burial with a few strips of beacon thrown in for good measure?
 
Did I say being good sports will extinguish anything? No. Killing terrorists will do that. That falls under violence. The urination was unnecessary.

The urination falls under intimidation. Intimidating the enemy into losing his will to make war means fewer American casualties. Why wouldn't it be a tool on our belt to use against the enemy?
 
The urination falls under intimidation. Intimidating the enemy into losing his will to make war means fewer American casualties. Why wouldn't it be a tool on our belt to use against the enemy?

Intimidation is a MOAB on a tunnel complex. Or a Hellfire up the tailpipe of your BFF.

Urination is an insult at most.
 
USViking said:
They should have given the guy a Bronze Star.

Good conduct Medal would also help get the point across.



no, they shouldn't have.


His actions stir the enemies resolve and leads to more dead good guys. He should at least, not got caught.


However, the UCI that was involved as per the article was overblown. This was not an offense deserving of such harsh punishment and the overturning of the conviction was the right thing to do.

Sigh. So few people have any inkling of the concept and use of hyperbole.
 
Intimidation is a MOAB on a tunnel complex. Or a Hellfire up the tailpipe of your BFF.

Urination is an insult at most.

That works, too. It's a complete package and every tool on the belt should be used to win.
 
I agree only with the highlighted item.

Terrorists are so morally subhuman that their corpses deserve only the lowest disrespect.


It is about the corpse if it is a terrorist's corpse.


Well, since you are so upset about it maybe we should try something else. How about giving the corpse a nice burial with a few strips of beacon thrown in for good measure?

How about simply shooting the terrorist and not ruining your career over unprofessional foolishness so that people like you can get a boner? The sad thing about this is that these Marines lost their careers over something you label as "morally subhuman." Something "morally subhuman" is worth the effort of urination after you have extinguished the life and sent it off to hell? Is something "morally subhuman" worth your career? Apparently so.

Satisfaction comes from the kill. Not some petty stupidity, after the fact, that has absolutely nothing to do with the mission.
 
Last edited:
I have mixed emotions about that. The US Secretary of State Colin Powell delivered a US government check for $43 million to the Taliban back in April 2001 for their assistance in the drug war, so they must be the good guys, right?

Was that April 2001? April?

Fast forward to September 2001 when they showed their true colors by refusing to hand over Obama bin Laden. Until then they had not been complicit in any terrorist action against us, and it was considered worth it to try to work with them.
 
Was that April 2001? April?

Fast forward to September 2001 when they showed their true colors by refusing to hand over Obama bin Laden. Until then they had not been complicit in any terrorist action against us, and it was considered worth it to try to work with them.

May 2001.
 
How about simply shooting the terrorist and not ruining your career over unprofessional foolishness so that people like you can get a boner? The sad thing about this is that these Marines lost their careers over something you label as "morally subhuman." Something "morally subhuman" is worth the effort of urination after you have extinguished the life and sent it off to hell? Is something "morally subhuman" worth your career? Apparently so.

Satisfaction comes from the kill. Not some petty stupidity after the fact.

My whole point is that they should not have lost their careers. A letter of reprimand would have been sufficient punishment, and would not have barred them from promotion unless SOPs have changed since Chester Nimitz (do you know who he was?) got his letter of reprimand for no less than running his ship aground.
 
As an American citizen? I do. Pissing on a dead body doesn't represent American interests. That **** is recruiting material for the enemy. And against the standards we should hold ourselves too. He got off lucky. I would put his ass in front of a firing squad for that lack of discipline.
Geeeeee zus....

We took 14 highly trained assets out of action over a lapse in judgement. We effectively decommissioned an entire field unit that was out there killing bad guys. But you would go further and put em up against the wall. Because they pissed on the dead guy responsible for killing and dismembering one of their fellow Marines.

During a war? I'm handling it like a responsible ****ing leader and then I'm putting my assets back to work. I'm leaving the hand wringing to the politicians, brass polishers, and **** suckers eager to make rank.
 
May 2001.

The US asked Taliban to hand over OBL in 5/01?

That is not implausible, but I did not see reference to it in the first two "may 2001 taliban refused hand over bin laden" google pages.

Also, 9/11 gave us grounds for immediately ceasing to put up with Taliban's noncooperation.
 
My whole point is that they should not have lost their careers.

But that ceased to be an argument the moment they challenged and dared the leadership to do something about it in front of the entire world.

Had another leader got wind of this activity, and there was no YouTube video, they would have (should have) been chastised locally and sent on their way to kill some more, while keeping their peckers where they belonged. All just one of the SNCO's in the video had to do was say "stop being stupid" and there would have been no issue.
 
Last edited:
It isn't an effing tool except to promote more discord among less radicalized Muslims.

Intimidation is absolutely a tool to be used against the enemy.
 
But that ceased to be an argument the moment they challenged and dared the leadership to do something about it in front of the entire world.

I kind of doubt it crossed the mind of whoever posted the video that it might be considered a challenge to the leadership.

I mean, nobody could be stupid enough to knowingly, needlessly antagonize the Commandant of the US Marines!

Rather, I expect the poster assumed it would be under leadership's radar.


Had another leader got wind of this activity, and there was no YouTube video, they would have (should have) been chastised locally and sent on their way to kill some more, while keeping their peckers where they belonged. All just one of the SNCO's in the video had to do was say "stop being stupid" and there would have been no issue.
Come on- somebody says "naughty naughty" and General Amos says "Well, that makes everything OK- Carry on!"?
 
I kind of doubt it crossed the mind of whoever posted the video that it might be considered a challenge to the leadership.

See the point of maintaining professionalism even in the face of the enemy? These were not 18 and 19 year olds. They knew what they did was unethical. They knew it was unbecoming. Yet, they chose to do it, film it, and publish it. It not crossing their minds about what they were doing is the whole problem.


Come on- somebody says "naughty naughty" and General Amos says "Well, that makes everything OK- Carry on!"?

Why would General Amos even know about it if there wasn't a video for the world to see? Marines are corrected by the leadership everyday for a range of issues. This would have been no different were it a local issue to deal with. They wouldn't have even gotten a Page 11. But they damn well should have been corrected. General Amos wouldn't have known about this incident anymore than he would have known about the Marine that got his ass chewed for being UA to formation or a Marine that received NJP for insubordination.
 
Last edited:
See the point of maintaining professionalism even in the face of the enemy? These were not 18 and 19 year olds. They knew what they did was unethical. They knew it was unbecoming. Yet, they chose to do it, film it, and publish it. It not crossing their minds about what they were doing is the whole problem.

Why would General Amos even know about it if there wasn't a video for the world to see? Marines are corrected by the leadership everyday for a range of issues. This would have been no different were it a local issue to deal with. They wouldn't have even gotten a Page 11. But they damn well should have been corrected. General Amos wouldn't have known about this incident anymore than he would have known about the Marine that got his ass chewed for being UA to formation or a Marine that received NJP for insubordination.

Fine, let's send them those Letters of Reprimand and I mentioned earlier. Maybe dock them so pay too.

And then DROP IT.

But no, leadership has a **** fit and makes the whole thing drag out for five years when their best move would have been a slap on the wrist and then DROP IT.
 
The urination falls under intimidation. Intimidating the enemy into losing his will to make war means fewer American casualties. Why wouldn't it be a tool on our belt to use against the enemy?

No. It falls under a disgrace to the uniform and the American public. This has nothing to do with intimidation. It has to do with an undisciplined piece of **** forgetting the objective. Put him in front of a firing squad.
 
Fine, let's send them those Letters of Reprimand and I mentioned earlier. Maybe dock them so pay too.

And then DROP IT.

But no, leadership has a **** fit and makes the whole thing drag out for five years when their best move would have been a slap on the wrist and then DROP IT.

Best move would be to make example of captain piss ant for his complete and utter lack of respect for the uniform and encouraging the enemy to create more terrorists. He lost sight of the objective. The point isn't to kill or intimate the enemy. It is to end the war. No nation benefits from prolonged warfare. And it is utterly sickening to see people defend this trash.
 
Geeeeee zus....

We took 14 highly trained assets out of action over a lapse in judgement. We effectively decommissioned an entire field unit that was out there killing bad guys. But you would go further and put em up against the wall. Because they pissed on the dead guy responsible for killing and dismembering one of their fellow Marines.

During a war? I'm handling it like a responsible ****ing leader and then I'm putting my assets back to work. I'm leaving the hand wringing to the politicians, brass polishers, and **** suckers eager to make rank.

**** that. Anyone leader who tolerates that blatant of a lapse in judgement is a dip****. And also has know ****ing clue what they are doing. You don't win wars by pissing on bodies. You should be winning wars without ever fighting them. Read Sun Tzu. And we don't need any more war. What we need is to be out of the Mideast and stop creating enemies with this bull****.

And your damn right I would make an example of them and line them up on the wall. That wasn't a lapse in judgement. It was a ****ing war crime. Any man who would do less is less than a man.
 
Back
Top Bottom