# \[sigh\].....US Chopper fires on wedding party. 40+ dead **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 19, 2004, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997 "2004-05-19T17:50:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/141 "2004-05-20T20:24:01Z")
> [@Aldebaran](#): > > No. You said I was wrong in my interpretation. I’m still waiting for you to explain that. > > Salaam. A Read our posts on this thread again, A. Here’s what’s going on: 1. A bunch of posters say that firing bullets in the air is dumb. 2. You say it’s not dumb, it’s tradition. 3. Hilarity ensues. 4. You later say that all these posters now claim that the Iraqis are \*\*aiming \*\* weapons at each other. 5. I ask you to direct me to one solitary post where someone claims this. 6. You cry that your interpretation is correct. Here’s the point, Aldebaran. No one said or claimed or inferred that Iraqis aim weapons at each other to celebrate weddings. No one. You went straight from “firing bullets in the air that are going to come down and possibly scramble someone’s brains is not a good idea” to “Iraqis are complete idiots who have no more sense than to aim guns directly at each other and shoot”. \*\*That \*\* is what I take offense to. It’s most likely a language impass here. But the fact is, no one takes you seriously when you don’t recognize that fact. 95% of the arguments you get in are due to the fact that you refuse to acknowledge this. You make broad sweeping generalizations that piss everyone off, and then refuse to back down. It’s really fricken tiresome. And it happens in nearly all of the threads you participate in. And it’s a shame, because for a while in the last few weeks you’ve had a lot of valuable things to say. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/142 "2004-05-20T20:27:25Z")
> [@Aldebaran](#): > > 1. The fact that shooting in the air in the middle of a crowded street (or whatever crowded place) can indeed be dangerous for some bystanders far or nearby, has nothing to do with the issue at hand, nor with the assertion of people who discussion. Projectiles always have to end up _somewhere_. If one wants to just shoot at nothing, the middle of a desert is a good place to do so. Even better would be to have a specific target or not shoot at all. > [@](#): > > _2. I already said that accidents can’t be excluded with this sort of tradition, yet that it is not likely to happen in a remote village where people celebrate a wedding and where there is empty space enough to shoot at ._ Again, nobody really knows which way the Iraqis were shooting. Anything near perpendicular would endanger anyone in the immediate vicinity, including the revelers. If they really _were_ revelers. > [@](#): > > _3. Why make a law if there is already one on this very same issue?_ Because the creator of the previous law is no longer in power? Assuming both our stories are accurate, of course. > [@](#): > > _4. It is not because I wouldn’t start shooting in the air on no matter which given occasion I want to celebrate, that I have a problem with people who’s tradition it is for doing so._ Traditions can be changed. > [@](#): > > _How many houses burned down because of Christmas trees, because of unattended candles, because of sigarettes?. How many died because of fireworks? How many drowned because of recreation sports. How many get shot on hunting trips? How many deaths in accidents involving drunken drivers?_ Got enough straw there? ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/143 "2004-05-20T20:47:58Z")
> [@Mehitabel](#): > > I’m a little confused–people were shooting their guns off into the air with their little children standing right next to them? And the little children were out at 2:30 am? > > Things ain’t quite adding up. I’m not sure why several people, in this thread and in the other one in great debates are surprised that the celebrations would last later than 2:30. Maybe it’s not the custom in the US, but it’s rather the norm in many other places. As for the chidren, they weren’t necessarily standing right next. They could have been sleeping in the house. And anyway, I wouldn’t find it surprising that children would be still awake late at night during a marriage. ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/144 "2004-05-20T20:48:12Z")
> [@Jurph](#): > > It’s pretty simple, **Aldebaran** - you infer from the objection to firing into the air a stipulation that was not made. The majority of posters in this thread who object to firing “up in the air” really mean firing “not directly at someone” or “not parallel to the ground.” That’s a non-obvious distinction, and I’ll go ahead and give you a pass for that based on our language differences. Yes. But in my opinion they overlook the fact that someone who is in the middle of a crowd has the brains to take care of it not to hit someone else when firing 'not directly at someone". Therefore they call it “stupid” and theones who do this “idiots” while they are all but stupid idiots because nobody wants a celebration to end in tears over dead or wounded people. > [@](#): > > That said, their objection is not that the firing is “at their own wedding party” (your words). The objection is that the bullets, which are **not aimed** could nonetheless come back down with enough force to kill someone. Because they’re being fired from within a village, we can’t really tell if they were taking care not to hit their own village or not, but the objection remains. **It is irresponsible to fire a bullet when you are uncertain what it might hit.** See above. Your reasoning can count when someone starts to do this on a crowded street. > [@](#): > > The other half of the objection is also pretty simple: regardless of anyone’s “right to be there,” or any “tradition” that seems to have sprung up since the invention of the assault rifle, **when one is living in an occupied country, and fires a weapon, one may expect that the occupiers will fire back**. You have to prove me that 1. these villagers had no contact with the US military and thus did not expect any helicopter to show up (we heard storiess they did have contact with ground troops) or 2. these villagers could remotely imagine that firing in the air in celebration would provokes their village to be flattened. 3. these people who have this tradition have even an idea that the occupyers have no idea about that tradition. > [@](#): > > Neither of these objections has anything to do with whether the members of the wedding are being injured by the gunfire – the objections are, instead, appeals to the Iraqis to think about the consequences of their actions, and not willfully ignore facts of the world around them (your bullet will come down and hit something; there are people in this country armed to the teeth who object to you firing a weapon). See above. I find it really amazing that all who post things like that take it for granted that 1. Iraqis in remote villages reason like you do. 2. All Iraqis know everything about the US occupyers and their habits to fire on wedding parties in respond of celebration firing. 3. All Iraqis must constantly “think about consequences” coming from the occupyers when they do this or that according their traditions. 4. Iraqis in a remote village in a deserted region have contact with the world. On this subject I can tell you that there are many villages in this region of the world where there is even no electricity and where people live the life their ancestors lived hundreds and hundreds of years ago. Well, maybe a bit more in this age and century in the sense that there is one postal office every 100 km or so, there is a hospital at a distance of 60 to 100 km. if they are lucky, that some may have a windmill to produce electricity (that asks already for an investment many people can’t even think about) or have battery radios or the likes. Maybe you could take this picture into your perspective of what you talk about here. (But I think you must go travelling a bit in such countries to understand what I mean. ) > [@](#): > > Of course, talking to you about “willfully ignoring facts” is kind of like trying to teach al-Zarqawi about knife safety. I think I shall better ignore this. I must admit it is a bit more original then when you would have said " is kind like trying to tell an Arab that beating his wife is not normal". I give you credit for your imagination. > [@](#): > > One last question: does anyone else think that a thread with **Shodan** and **Aldebaran** arguing resembles a cat with buttered toast strapped to its back? One last question to you: Could you try to post at and about me in a less denigrating manner? Thank you. (An by the way: I’m not in for torturing cats.) Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/145 "2004-05-20T20:50:26Z")
> [@xcheopis](#): > > Do the Iraquis consider that a negligible amount? Could it be gifts for the marriage?? ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/146 "2004-05-20T21:01:16Z")
Jeff, Maybe you should get yourself to a trip for touring the New US territory Iraq to “change traditions”. I’m sure you can find a lot of proselytizers to go with you and change their religion too, while you are busy to dictate them how the must live according to you. Many people in the USA really would love to see Iraq as one great Christian nation Under God sustaining the USA Capitalism. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/147 "2004-05-20T21:02:39Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > They fired on ground troops? When did they say that? I call bullshit. Every indication is that they were firing into the air. Firing on troops my fucking ass. [Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt (search) said the attack was launched after U.S. forces received “specific intelligence” about foreign fighters slipping into the country. “We sent a ground force in to the location,” he told Associated Press Television News. “They were shot at. We returned fire.”](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120436,00.html) > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Yes, that’s exactly what the fuck they were fucking aiming at and they _were_ “light hearted revellers,” so fuck you, Quit making excuses to slaughter children, Christian. Not quite. They were aiming at the sky. There were gunships in the sky. This was a war zone. And it is by no means certain to anyone who does not reflexively hate everything and everyone associated with anything Bush has ever done or thought about that these were innocent partygoers. > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Fucking stupid-ass, irrelevant hijack. How many drunken hunting accidents happen in the US every year. And exactly how are drunken hunting accidents relevant to this? Talk about irrelevant hijacks. > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > At least the Iraqis are fucking sober. Please provide a cite that they were sober. You made an asserton; prove it. > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Speculating about the remote possibility of a bullet coming down and hitting someone is a pretty stupid reason to SHOOT THE WHOLE FUCKING PARTY TO SHIT. That is not the reason the alleged wedding guests were fired upon. They were fired upon because the US troops believed they were firing at them. > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I’ll fucking say it. It’s harmless. It’s at least as harmless as driving to the grocery store even though car accidents happen. Which means you are just as stupid as the dolts firing their weapons off into the air. If that is what they were doing. > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I see, they might get murdered by the illegal invaders, so that makes them stupid. Blame the fucking victims. I’m sure that’s in the Bible somewhere. Put in your usual hysterically stupid and moronically foam-flecked way, but essentially correct. Firing into the air, when there are US gunships flying about, is very, very stupid. As we have seen. If, as I mentioned, that is really what they were doing. But it is not in the Bible. > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > They _weren’t_ shot at. They had zero fucking cause. > > The Iraqi wedding party wasn’t shooting at anybody. Could I request that you choose a story, and stick to it? Either they were firing their weapons into the air (and no one, including you, denies that part) or they were not. If they were, then there was certainly fucking cause. > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Of course it WOULD be stupid to attack a force you can’t beat. That’s what makes the intimations that a wedding party full of women and children was trying to attack US troops completely absurd. Safe House my fucking ass. Same problem. You keep contradicting yourself. First they **aren’t** doing anything stupid. Now they are. Having trouble making up your mind again? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/148 "2004-05-20T21:07:31Z")
As a piece of additional info for posters who really can’t imagine that other countries have other ways and traditions then they have: My wedding lasted a week. Day and night. Children of the family and other guests ran in and out everywhere. Do you have anything against that? As for the money thing: It is a wide spread custom to give money and juwelry as wedding gift. In a lot of nations and a lot of places and not only in the ME. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/149 "2004-05-20T21:07:31Z")
> [@Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor](#): > > So, they’re supposed to learn everything about a country while standing on one foot? :dubious: I would expect them to be taught about local peculiarities they could have to face/handle. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/150 "2004-05-20T21:18:57Z")
> [@Aldebaran](#): > > Maybe you should get yourself to a trip for touring the New US territory Iraq to “change traditions”. I’m sure you can find a lot of proselytizers to go with you and change their religion too, while you are busy to dictate them how the must live according to you. > Many people in the USA really would love to see Iraq as one great Christian nation Under God sustaining the USA Capitalism. Grasping at the remains of your strawman, I see. You just _have_ to find something to defend against, don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/151 "2004-05-20T21:25:27Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > **Metacom** , > > You can’t explain why shooting a gun at _any_ angle in the middle of a large group of people (including women and _children_, btw), let alone in the middle of a _war zone_, is fundamentally _safe_, let alone _less_ dangerous th **a** n hunting, so you resort to these fallacious and offensive accusations of racism. Shooting a gun in the air (besides shot in shotguns) is dangerous in populated areas. But it is extremely common celebratory act in Iraq and many parts of the Middle East. Awfully common in my neck of the woods on New Years too. Common sense would dictate not blowing the location of that small arms fire to smitherenes. ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/152 "2004-05-20T21:26:37Z")
> [@Machetero](#): > > smitherenes. smithereens ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/153 "2004-05-20T21:30:44Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] [Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt (search) said the attack was launched after U.S. forces received “specific intelligence” about foreign fighters slipping into the country. “We sent a ground force in to the location,” he told Associated Press Television News. “They were shot at. We returned fire.”](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120436,00.html) They weren’t shot at, they just _thought_ they just heard gunfire and jumped to conclusions. The ground troops had withdrawn and were in no danger. I give no credibility at all to some fucking lying shill from the miltary. The military has less credibility than the Iraqi minister of information these days. Dozens of civillian witness are a much more credible source than a mouthpiece for the military. You might as well listen to OJ’s lawyers as listen to those fucks. > [@](#): > > Not quite. They were aiming at the sky. Aiming at the sky+ aiming at nothing. And according to your linked story, the slaughter commenced five hours after the celebratory gunshots were fired. Doesn’t sound like there was much imminent danger to me. > [@](#): > > There were gunships in the sky. Which were in no danger from the ground. > [@](#): > > This was a war zone. War zone? Your president says the war is over. Is he a liar? > [@](#): > > And it is by no means certain to anyone who does not reflexively hate everything and everyone associated with anything Bush has ever done or thought about that these were innocent partygoers. WTF does Bush have to do with anything? Have I blamed Bush for this incident? All of the evidence says they were innocent party goers. ZERO evidence says they were anything else. > [@](#): > > And exactly how are drunken hunting accidents relevant to this? Talk about irrelevant hijacks. Just matching one stupid, moralistic comment with another one. Whether celebratory gunfire in the desert constitutes a remote, largely theoretical chance of injury to others is not an excuse to slaughter their children. > [@](#): > > Please provide a cite that they were sober. You made an asserton; prove it. Alcohol is forbidden by Islamic law, dipshit. Muslims don’t drink. Learn something about other cultures. > [@](#): > > That is not the reason the alleged wedding guests were fired upon. They were fired upon because the US troops believed they were firing at them. > Which means you are just as stupid as the dolts firing their weapons off into the air. If that is what they were doing. That is exactly what they were doing according to all available evidence. No Americans were in danger. The slaughter occurred several hours after the gunfire. > [@](#): > > Put in your usual hysterically stupid and moronically foam-flecked way, but essentially correct. Firing into the air, when there are US gunships flying about, is very, very stupid. As we have seen. Blame the victims, blame the victims, blame the victims. > [@](#): > > If, as I mentioned, that is really what they were doing. But it is not in the Bible. > Could I request that you choose a story, and stick to it? What story have I changed. The slaughter was unprovoked and unnecessary. No one shot at the Americans. No Americans were in danger. How have I deviated from that position? > [@](#): > > Either they were firing their weapons into the air (and no one, including you, denies that part) or they were not. If they were, then there was certainly fucking cause. It wasn’t a _justified_ cause, > [@](#): > > First they **aren’t** doing anything stupid. Now they are. > > Having trouble making up your mind again? No, I was saying _hypothetically_ it would have been stupid for them to attack a bunch of heavily armed, trigger happy invaders who would respond by slaughtering their families where they slept. That’s why I find any suggestion that they _did_ such a thing to be beyond any serious credulity. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/154 "2004-05-20T21:34:16Z")
BTW: the use of fireworks in the US has been used as a counter example. This may or may not be a good comparison, depending on how you look at it. States have outlawed certain fireworks, some local jurisdictions have outlawed them completely. Large firecrackers, like what you see in cartoons such as Tom & Jerry, have been made illegal by the Federal Goverment. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/155 "2004-05-20T21:50:33Z")
> [@Machetero](#): > > Shooting a gun in the air (besides shot in shotguns) is dangerous in populated areas. But it is extremely common celebratory act in Iraq and many parts of the Middle East. Yes and yes. I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying here. No, deserts aren’t densely populated overall, but that doesn’t mean that the area that comprises the little village isn’t densely populated relative its size in area. If you’re standing in the middle of a populated village or standing in the middle of a suburb, what difference is there, really? If two guys went out into the middle of the desert, far away from where any people lived, and wanted to shoot guns off into the night sky, I’d agree that that’s not necessarily dangerous at all (supposing that they aren’t shooting them straight up into the air). If a bunch of guys in a village where children are anywhere nearby, are firing guns at no particular target, willy-nilly into the air at any angle at all, whether up, down or sideways, that’s a dangerous and idiotic thing to do, tradition or not. Add to that the fact that their village is located in close proximity to a border crossing where military troops from an invading nation are constantly patrolling for insurgents and you have a disaster waiting to happen if you fire off weapons for any reason other than self-protection. > [@](#): > > Awfully common in my neck of the woods on New Years too. Common sense would dictate not blowing the location of that small arms fire to smitherenes. Indeed. It is a gross tragedy. But common sense would also dictate modifying your traditional behaviour when you have children present in a dangerous area with occupying forces constantly patrolling with air and ground troops. Again, they did not deserve to die. I am vehemently opposed to (what I believe to be) this illegal occupation of their nation. My heart breaks and aches for all the Iraqi families whose lives have been destroyed by our carelessness and brutishness in their country. I still think it’s reasonable and sensible for them to refrain from doing _anything_ that could even remotely be seen as agressive behaviour as long as our idiotic cowboys are there pointing guns and bombs at them. ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/156 "2004-05-20T21:55:26Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > Read our posts on this thread again, A. Here’s what’s going on: > > 1. A bunch of posters say that firing bullets in the air is dumb. > 2. You say it’s not dumb, it’s tradition. > 3. Hilarity ensues. > 4. You later say that all these posters now claim that the Iraqis are \*\*aiming \*\* weapons at each other. > 5. I ask you to direct me to one solitary post where someone claims this. > 6. You cry that your interpretation is correct. 1. Yes, they did. 2. No. I said it is tradition. That has nothing to do with my opinion on it and everything with pointing out that it is these people’s tradition and that they have every right to their traditions. (I said that I wouldn’t do it yet that this doesn’t change the fact that I recognize people have the right to such a tradition). 3. I don’t see anything of that here. I only see people getting tensed because they can’t get me on my knees. (To those who still don’t know it: I only kneel for God). 4. I say I make that up out of these posts. 5. I ask you to say why you think my interpretation is not correct. 6. I say it is. That is not “crying”. That is waiting for you to prove me wrong. > [@](#): > > Here’s the point, Aldebaran. No one said or claimed or inferred that Iraqis aim weapons at each other to celebrate weddings. No one. You went straight from “firing bullets in the air that are going to come down and possibly scramble someone’s brains is not a good idea” to “Iraqis are complete idiots who have no more sense than to aim guns directly at each other and shoot”. \*\*That \*\* is what I take offense to. It is what they in my view imply when out of the blue claiming that these people are idiots for shooting in the air. It is implying that these people don’t know what they do = the same as if one claims that they don’t know that you do not aim at your guests = they look at these people as if they aim at their guest instead of aiming somewhere where a dropping bullet causes no harm. Why else all this argumentation that a dropping bullet “could” kill or wound a bystander. > [@](#): > > It’s most likely a language impass here. This can be. And coming from both sides of the argument. > [@](#): > > But the fact is, no one takes you seriously when you don’t recognize that fact. 95% of the arguments you get in are due to the fact that you refuse to acknowledge this. Which fact? That I have no idea about the English language? Quote me where I say otherwise then that I indeed have not studied this language. > [@](#): > > You make broad sweeping generalizations that piss everyone off, and then refuse to back down. > It’s really fricken tiresome. And it happens in nearly all of the threads you participate in. And it’s a shame, because for a while in the last few weeks you’ve had a lot of valuable things to say. Where do I make “broad generalisations”? My impression is that people are all too willing to take whatever I write for what it is not intended to be. (This includes Lynn Bodoni as is proven). When I first came on this website I asked a moderator if I could post a clarifying thread about a few things that hinder me to express myself clearly when using this language. I didn’t get any reply on that request, so I saw that as a refusal. Yet I think that after a year of reading my posts, my writing style and my use of this language should be a bit clear. You can take whatever someone writes wrong if you want to. That is even 100% easier to do with something written by someone who doesn’t speak your language. I find this habit - entertained wich visible joy by a few of the members here - depending the case and the member: 1. utterly childish 2. extremely dishonest 3. utterly ridiculous 4. self-centered arrogant 5. stupid in its clear rudiness 6. ungrateful to the extreme. In the same way as people have no clue about what they are talking about but are quick to scold on the Iraqis who are now dead because they were celebrating a wedding like they celebrate a wedding (assuming this is the true side of the story), people have no clue what it is like to write in a language you have not one single bit of a background in. Try yourself to write in a language you never studied. Compose a post. Write an answer to this post of mine. Then we shall talk again when I start taking your words one by one and attack them one by one on intentions I deliberately give them yet that you did not mean to be there at all. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![TeaElle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8491ac/32.png) [@TeaElle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TeaElle)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/157 "2004-05-20T22:33:57Z")
> [@Aldebaran](#): > > You have to prove me that > > 1. these villagers had no contact with the US military and thus did not expect any helicopter to show up (we heard storiess they did have contact with ground troops) or > 2. these villagers could remotely imagine that firing in the air in celebration would provokes their village to be flattened. > 3. these people who have this tradition have even an idea that the occupyers have no idea about that tradition. Aldebaran, you’re clearly hung up on the fact that this is a “tradition” and therefore, apparently, that excuses the behavior. What you fail to understand is that it simply does not. No matter what the reason, shooting a weapon in a war zone is a dangerous and can bring about unwanted confrontation with armed soldiers or artillery. In a war zone, some plans and customs and “traditions” have to be suspended, especially traditions which are dangerous or run counter of what is permitted by law or circumstance. Firing weapons, in this instance, is dangerous **and** runs counter to what is permitted by **both** law and circumstance in current day Iraq. **Even if** the Iraqis do not reason as others might and don’t see the inherent danger in shooting guns in the sky, **even if** the Iraqis didn’t have the common sense to realize that shooting weapons would bring the attention – and perhaps retaliation – of American troops, **even if** these Iraqis couldn’t spare a moment to think about the consequences of their actions, the precipitating act of firing weapons was ill-thought _at best_. Why are you unwilling to accept that **even if** this was a wedding (which remains to be seen) that there is some responsibility on the part of the revelers to behave in a safe manner, and shooting guns in the air in a war zone is **not** behaving in a safe manner? ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/158 "2004-05-20T22:39:08Z")
Thought I’d provide a case of a centuries-old tradition which has been prohibited by that country’s rulers since (IIRC) 1996: [Burma’s Pai Dong Karen practice of neck stretching](http://www.gluckman.com/LongNeck.html). Some of the tribe have complied while others fled to Thailand. Granted, the tribe is a minority but that doesn’t change the fact that this is a tradition undergoing change _without_ any US influence. Want another example? [Chinese foot binding](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a981023.html). See, **Aldebaran** , change _can_ come from within. ---
**Author:** ![Chastain86](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Chastain86](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chastain86)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/159 "2004-05-20T23:04:03Z")
**Aldebaran** , I have never said this to another human being, either here or on any other message board. I hope I never have to repeat myself. I wish to hell you would shut up, and go the fuck away. You will defend your shoddy reasoning to the death, it seems, without ever once hearing or considering any other opinion than your own. You offer nothing in the way of reasoned debate. You bring absolutely nothing to the table other than your opinion, which we’ve heard hundreds of times. This community would be better off without you, and we are poorer because you choose to make this your home. One day you will disappear, and no one here will miss your rhetoric by one degree. Loudmouthed assholes are a dime a dozen, cousin. Begin backing up your prejudice with fact and perhaps that will change. Not that I’m holding my breath on that. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997/160 "2004-05-20T23:47:58Z")
Why is everyone getting their panties so knotted up about **Aldebaran**? Isn’t he fundamentally right that Iraqis have a right to practice their own traditions in their own country without getting slaughtered? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sigh-us-chopper-fires-on-wedding-party-40-dead/245997.md?page=9)