One could argue, and one does, that there’s an extremely thin line between “overagressive tactics” and “open malice.” Specially in light of the “lack of accountability.”
But above and beyond that, I can certainly realize we’re seeing differerent opticians. It just so happens that I am wearing an “Universal Prescription,” and unlike yours, mine has no shades of jingoism. Meaning that there’s simply NO justification to invade a sovereign nation under false premises and outright lies and butchering countless of innocents in the process.
And if you did in fact read the report, you’ll note the operative word there is indeed, “countless.” Guess the only ones that “count” are your own.
Why would a US soldier want to kill an innocent civilian, given the RPG, ambush, hostility situation already? Not to say that innocent people don’t die all the time everywhere, especially in fire fights between guerilla forces and soldiers in urban areas.
If there are homicidal soldiers (I know, aren’t they all), they should be prosecuted.
Red Fury, I’m jingoist because I don’t think there’s a large number of American troops sighting their rifles on innocent civilians for the Hell of it? I’m jingoist because I don’t think it’s a duck hunt? OK buddy, I can see your mind was made up before you read the report or Sailor’s mischarachterization of it. I have no desire to continue a highjack when my opponent is a semi-literate. My part in this highjack ends here.
For the record, I’m vehemently against continued occupation by a unilaterally American force and am dismayed about the lack of oversight the current force experiences. “Jingoist” indeed.
Sailor, I have addressed your comments in the other thread. We are veering dangerously close to an argument over semantics (what constitutes “often” anyway?). Let’s just end it here.
While Eve misunderstood the quote, you did too. He was not asking if anyone wanted cites, he was stating that we would like photos of innocent people being slaughtered, because we enjoy causing pain to other peoples.
I learn a lot about the mindset of several posters on this message board.
Accusing someone to be a “liar” while willfully lie yourself about his postings must be fun to do, since some people around here make it their hobby.
Willfully misreading and willfully changing and willfully lying about my posts, willfully make generalisations out of the text where there most explicitely are none, willfully add intentions that aren’t even remotely to be found, must also be very funny to do since some people here make it their hobby.
Taking my writings for what they are not, my “US’er” for an insult because it feels so good to play the martyr in complete disregard of what I said about why I write this and how it happens that my posts vary from merely readable to approaching readability, must be also very funny since people areound here make it their hobby.
Posing as a Muslim, coming on the boards under a most unlikely membername ever to be used by a Muslim, posting the most ridiculous crap, must also be very funny since there is one here who makes it his/her hobby.
Next making it seem as if that fake and myself are one and the same must also be very funny, since there are people here who make it their hobby.
By the way: I’ve send a mail to the moderators that I’m convinced the Akbar person is a fake and that I suspect one of the fervent Alderbaran BBQ pitters to be behind it.
Please proceed with exercising your hobbies.
It is good entertainement to come by now and then and read your most hateful yet most amusing sillyness.
No one exposes him/herself more for what he/she really is then on a silly board like this one.
Have a nice day.
Salaam. A
I am sure (somewhat) that calling someone a “troll” is not allowed on the board, if you think someone is trolling the correct action would be to report them.
The_Raven, if you wish to make wild accusations of trollery, do so in an e-mail to the moderators only, or else. Since you’ve made the same rude statement twice in this thread already, consider this to be official warning one and two.
You’re not getting a third.
The_Raven, as I said, I have explained the meaning of my post in the other thread. In any case, you are being an asshole because in general I have not blamed the troops who I believe are also victims of the policies of the present government. The blame rests on who sent them there and who gives them orders. I am sure they would prefer to be back home.
I meant to indicate that people who applaud the killing of others and witness that they do so, and people who think they are the ones to decide that others are “to be sacrified” because of their obsession with war and bloodshed and “daisy cutters”, would most obviously take much pleasure in looking at pictures like that.
Someone thinks the CIA is in a postion to “arrest” me.
That is a very good one. The arrogance one can encounter by some type of US’ers is showing once again.
My dear, your terrorist organisation named CIA has no power over me at all. Sorry if that disappoints you, but this is a fact.
Don’t cry.
Salaam. A
Oh, go fuck yourself with a rusty spoon. Or shove a tree up your ass. Your pick. I’ve been trying to wade through Aldebaran’s bullshit for an hour, but the hamsters are on strike. Look at “Ladies and Gentlemen, Aldebaran!” and “Aldebaran, if you tried, could you be more condescending?” for his bullshit about speaking ten languages. He was repeatedly called to prove it, and wouldn’t, because his post is his cite.
But you can be really hard to follow, you know that?
Look, could you stick to simple (as opposed to compound) sentences? Really.
You get emotional on emotional topics and (I believe) your first language is inflected. Your vocabulary in English outdistances your grasp of the syntactical subtleties.
For example, your last sentance suggests that the people sacrificed are the ones obsessed with war and bloodshed; and the comma after ‘daisy cutter’ throws the whole sentence into a tailspin.
I’m not just nitpicking here; verb, noun and no clauses!. At least, use only clearly subordinate ones. Furthermore, there are rules for the use of commas.