Al-Qaeda video shows mutilated bodies of US soldiers - New England Patriots Forums

mikey · 07-10-2006, 07:29 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060711...unresthostages

.

***IcyPatriot*** · 07-10-2006, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikey

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060711...unresthostages

Ogrish.Com has the links to many of these horrible sights.
People who want to understand the horror of war should take a look.

Here's the link to Zarqawi getting a 500 pounder dropped on him.
http://www.ogrish.com/archives/2006/..._airstrike.wmv

***patsfan13*** · 07-10-2006, 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F.B.N.

Ogrish.Com has the links to many of these horrible sights.
People who want to understand the horror of war should take a look.

Here's the link to Zarqawi getting a 500 pounder dropped on him.
http://www.ogrish.com/archives/2006/..._airstrike.wmv

From Ralph Peters: http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/op...lph_peters.htm

[quote]KILL, DON'T CAPTURE
HOW TO SOLVE OUR PRISONER PROBLEM

July 10, 2006 -- THE British military defines experience as the ability to recognize a mistake the second time you make it. By that standard, we should be very experienced in dealing with captured terrorists, since we've made the same mistake again and again.
Violent Islamist extremists must be killed on the battlefield. Only in the rarest cases should they be taken prisoner. Few have serious intelligence value. And, once captured, there's no way to dispose of them.

Killing terrorists during a conflict isn't barbaric or immoral - or even illegal. We've imposed rules upon ourselves that have no historical or judicial precedent. We haven't been stymied by others, but by ourselves.

The oft-cited, seldom-read Geneva and Hague Conventions define legal combatants as those who visibly identify themselves by wearing uniforms or distinguishing insignia (the latter provision covers honorable partisans - but no badges or armbands, no protection). Those who wear civilian clothes to ambush soldiers or collect intelligence are assassins and spies - beyond the pale of law. Traditionally, those who masquerade as civilians in order to kill legal combatants have been executed promptly, without trial. Severity, not sloppy leftist pandering, kept warfare within some decent bounds at least part of the time. But we have reached a point at which the rules apply only to us, while our enemies are permitted unrestricted freedom. [/wuote]

Rest of the article is a worthwhile read. He should have argued the Hamdan case.

mikey · 07-10-2006, 11:31 PM

[QUOTE=patsfan13]From Ralph Peters: http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/op...lph_peters.htm

Quote:

KILL, DON'T CAPTURE
HOW TO SOLVE OUR PRISONER PROBLEM

July 10, 2006 -- THE British military defines experience as the ability to recognize a mistake the second time you make it. By that standard, we should be very experienced in dealing with captured terrorists, since we've made the same mistake again and again.
Violent Islamist extremists must be killed on the battlefield. Only in the rarest cases should they be taken prisoner. Few have serious intelligence value. And, once captured, there's no way to dispose of them.

Killing terrorists during a conflict isn't barbaric or immoral - or even illegal. We've imposed rules upon ourselves that have no historical or judicial precedent. We haven't been stymied by others, but by ourselves.

The oft-cited, seldom-read Geneva and Hague Conventions define legal combatants as those who visibly identify themselves by wearing uniforms or distinguishing insignia (the latter provision covers honorable partisans - but no badges or armbands, no protection). Those who wear civilian clothes to ambush soldiers or collect intelligence are assassins and spies - beyond the pale of law. Traditionally, those who masquerade as civilians in order to kill legal combatants have been executed promptly, without trial. Severity, not sloppy leftist pandering, kept warfare within some decent bounds at least part of the time. But we have reached a point at which the rules apply only to us, while our enemies are permitted unrestricted freedom. [/wuote]

Rest of the article is a worthwhile read. He should have argued the Hamdan case.

But we are killing the WRONG PEOPLE.

We are killing the Sunnis who have nothing to do with the 9/11 attack on America.

The BAD MEN are in AFGHANISTAN and PAKISTAN, not in Iraq.

***maverick4*** · 07-11-2006, 06:33 AM

This is exactly what I was talking about before in the rape/murder thread.
The allegations of the pre-meditated rape and murder of a teenage girl and her mother, father, and sister by 5 U.S. soldiers is EXTREMELY damaging to us in many ways.

It makes us lose any sort of moral superiority, and helps the Muslim world justify any kind of attack on us in their minds. You can bet these types of things will happen for the next two decades as a lot of Muslim youth grow up to communicate their current hate for us.

.

***patsfan13*** · 07-11-2006, 07:29 AM

If there was a crime committed and IF we were to let the criminals off without punishment THEN we would lose any sort of moral authority. The fact is there is an allegation the accused have been arrested and will stand trial.

If we are making sure criminals are being punished how is that extremely damaging?

Remember the Kurds and Shia were used to this type of treatment at the hands of Saddam (and his Sunni henchmen, the guys we are currently fighting) with no attempt at seeking oiut the criminals.

***IcyPatriot*** · 07-11-2006, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maverick4

This is exactly what I was talking about before in the rape/murder thread.
The allegations of the pre-meditated rape and murder of a teenage girl and her mother, father, and sister by 5 U.S. soldiers is EXTREMELY damaging to us in many ways.

It makes us lose any sort of moral superiority, and helps the Muslim world justify any kind of attack on us in their minds. You can bet these types of things will happen for the next two decades as a lot of Muslim youth grow up to communicate their current hate for us.

.

Sad but true...ours are crimes legally and morally...their acts are justified by religion and are way more henious. They have bombed children and mosques and we are not allowed a word about it. They bombed innocent people in subways and buses and we are not allowed a word about it.

I'm not saying retaliate and kill them all...just concurring that it is a battle that will never be justified because we appear wrong at every turn.

This is why I get so angry when liberals slam our own people. Not that they don't have the freedom of speech to speak their mind. Just that the extremeists use every negative word and deed they see as justification to please fri gging Allah.

07-11-2006, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

If there was a crime committed and IF we were to let the criminals off without punishment THEN we would lose any sort of moral authority. The fact is there is an allegation the accused have been arrested and will stand trial.

If we are making sure criminals are being punished how is that extremely damaging?

Remember the Kurds and Shia were used to this type of treatment at the hands of Saddam (and his Sunni henchmen, the guys we are currently fighting) with no attempt at seeking oiut the criminals.

Here it comes...there will no doubt be hundreds of "allegations" that our soldiers are rapists and murderers since the terrorists know that *ssholes like Murtha condemn soldiers for actions that they didnt even commit. think about it...

Turd Furguson · 07-11-2006, 02:54 PM

Murtha and the rest of the Bush Bad dummies will jump on any piece of info true or otherwise to help their own cause and indirectly, give propaganda to our enemies.

***patsfan13*** · 07-11-2006, 03:05 PM

To date this month 9 US military, at this pace this will be the lowest number of casualties in over 2 years. Hopefully this trend will continue until the number of US deaths goes to 0.

The Iraqi's are now involved in over 90% of operations they are taking the lead in the vast majority. in 30+% they are on their own with no US advisors.