Administrator please move if this is not the right forum. I am so outraged right now I may not be thinking clearly.
I’m reading reports of corpses being desecrated by some Iraqi sub-humans.
I call them sub-humans because anyone who desecrates bodies has lowered themselves beneath the human threshold. They obviously pervert and debase their own religion by committing such acts.
I hold nothing but contempt for such scum; they raise my blood pressure so much that I want to see them nuked for such attrocities. But deep down I know
nuking is extreme and cooler heads must prevail.
Nevertheless, such outrages must be addressed.
Am I wrong in assessing these “people” in this way?
Considering that you barely consider nuclear weapons to destroy millions of innocent people “extreme,” I think you need to re-evaluate your definition of barbarism. I mean, there are Americans who desecrate corpses, as well. Doesn’t mean we should nuke New York.
I’m not sure exactly what the debate is. Are you wrong for being prejudiced against millions of people by the acts of a few thousand?
Almost certainly, since there is no such species as “sub-human” on the planet, and animals are different creatures to humans. But if you provided a link as to what you’re talking about then we could tell you for sure.
To the OP, I understand your anger, but a perusal of the newspaper any given day should be enough to assure you that people of any nationality are quite capable of acts imhumane. Unfortunately wars tend to bring those acts to the forefront even moreso.
So killing people is Ok as long as you respect the dead bodies? American forces in Iraq have killed thousands of innocent Iraqis. I think it is the killing people that is most bad. After they are dead they do not care much that you respect their bodies.
So what do you propose?
This is so similar to Somalia. I really wonder if the entire footage I have seen will get much airtime in the USA and what effect it may have. It is horrific.
Every attack I have seen on westerners is followed by crowds coming out of the woodwork to cheer and yet many Americans still seem to believe the notion that Iraqis welcomed the invasion with open arms and this is just a few bad apples. It seems no amount of evidence will change their minds.
I say the reasonable response would be to exterminate the entire city. Then we let it be known that every similar action would be met by similar results. Some people simply can only understand force. So let us speak their language.
I can’t believe some of you. Outrage at the murders goes without saying (therefore I didn’t).
As to Americans descrating bodies here - are you talking about isolated psychopaths? We have 250 million people here and you might have a handful of instances of this. I have never heard of any American coming upon a death scene, and dragging the corpse around, let alone displaying it from a bridge.
There’s no where near that many people living in Iraq, so I expect a proportionally smaller amount of such behavior.
Look, obviously nuking is not an option, it’s just that I’m so pissed off that the idea crossed my mind. (I was similarly outraged by the crap in Somalia).
It’s just that seeing a disproportionate amount of such horrid behaviour in that part of the world leads me to believe these people are defective in some way, hence sub-human.
I probably did do “animals” a disservice by comparing these people to animals.
So, your proposal if I understand it is to exterminate an entire city’s worth of innocents because of the actions of a few extremists in their midst? How, exactly, will this do anything but slake the American thirst for revenge.
This notion, quite simply, is ludicrous. You seem to be proposing that there is an entire culture of people that is somehow defective and therefore, what, should be wiped out? This has been tried in the past, you know. Today we call it an atrocity.
While extreme, I believe Dogface’s idea is to give a warning that harboring those
“extremists” is unacceptable and potentially lethal.
Like the teacher who keeps an entire class after school when a guilty party won’t come forth and no one will expose the guilty party.
This is again another flaw in people (all over the world). This misguided notion to protect a guilty party because they are somehow “one of your own”. If a member of a group I’m part of disgraces the group, I no longer want them to be part of the group.
Unfortunately so many groups behave more like primitive tribes.
I guess I’m hijacking my own thread here, so I’ll drop this line of thought for another day.
Maybe your thread belongs in the Pit, BwanaBob. At best.
If Dogface thinks the “reasonable response would be to exterminate the entire city” presumably he would mutiliate a few corpses at the drop of a hat. If he was being reasonable, and the wind were southerly.
Sometimes I hate these message boards because somehow analogies are misunderstood if the severities of the two scenarios are not identical.
The concept here (since you did not understand it) is that
you punish the group since you cannot isolate the one guilty party, with the expectation that the group will be outraged and give up the guilty party.
You’re aware that no (real) war is going on in America at present right? However if you want to take a look back you’ll find similar atrocities committed in the here during wars (the Civil War, and numerous incidents involving Native Americans springs to mind) and times of civil unrest (the civil rights movement as well as several other instances of horrific violence against black people, just to bring it a little closer to current times). My point was that civil behavior tends to go out the window during times of war/civil unrest. The fact that similar atrocities happen here without such extenuating circumstances merely underlines that point.
I don’t like speaking for others but I believe Dogface’s idea is to punish one city with the “lesson” to other cities being “if you harbor extremists, you will share their fate, so expel/give them up”.