American Captive Beheaded in Iraq

[Larry_OHF]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: ...And Skunk, a big F-U for making allegations out of thin air and forcing me to do homework, twit. Do your own research next time. And please read the report before replying. [/QB]

Can anyone point out the problem with this quote?

Let's quote Ziroc, from his sticky thread on this forum:

* You may debate (No personal attacks and/or subtle jab's)

I think that says it all without further mention. That post was not even subtle! I get many complaints from many members all week long about how rude people are on this forum, but this is the worst I have seen it yet.

T.L. Ziroc, like the other mods, received a Report Post on this thread, in reference to your venting. I think your rudeness calls for a suspension, but Ziroc always has the final say.

Any more rudeness like that from anyone on this topic, and it will get locked down. You guys are supposed to be following Memnoch's advice, which states: DON'T LEAVE IT PURELY TO THE MODERATORS TO CONTROL YOUR BEHAVIOUR.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Link: Second: I honestly can't believe you brought 9/11 into this whole thing. It has utterly nothing to do with the discussion, and it sure as hell doesn't make the use of (in this particular example) flag pins legitimate.

Read Cereks post again. The issue of the pins, was station employees were wearing them just after 9/11, when the edict was issued from management. It has EVERYTHING to do with the discussion.

As to "moving on" I still have friends out of work as a result. The area is irrevocably changed. Every day I walk past it it reminds me. Easy for you to say when you're on the other side of the pond. You can visit the WTC like a tourist and then "move on". You don;t have to stare at the huge hole in the ground.

[Memnoch]

Originally posted by Link: quote: Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by Link: I'm sorry Cerek, but what idiot patriotic broadcasting channel lets its employees wear American Flag pins???

One that's in a nation that just suffered it's worst attack ever. One just dealt a massive kick in the guts that needed every bit of solidarity it could get.

Would you condemn Spainish for wearing flags after the train attack? Show some sensitivity. Or is your memory deficient to the point that 9/11 holds no relevence or meaning to you?

Certainly your inability to understand little human things like grief, bonding, loyalty, pain and suffering are bewildering to say the least. [/QUOTE]

First off: my frustration (note that I never ever even used the word anger in my post) came from the fact that everywhere I look, listen and point my direction to I see American people totally glorifying their country. And I don't care a damn thing about America; I don't need to know how great it is, how rich it is, how powerful it is, or how many people in America wear white socks for the same matter. Patriotism is one thing, Yorick, fanaticism (as I described) is taking the love for your own country too far. Sure, I'll cheer for my home country when the European Championships football will start in Portugal, but [insert exquisite exaggeration] I won't walk about screaming "I love the Netherlands" like a blatant idiot constantly all day [/exquisite exaggeration]
[/QUOTE]Link, relax mate. To be fair, there have been few posts in this forum "glorifying" America in the last few days. In fact, the majority of posts here lately have been very critical of America, and rightly so based on the latest situation. The Americans here have kept their cool reasonably well for the most part, given the subject matter. It's difficult to understand the American psyche unless you actually move there and live there - you will understand their perspective, even if you disagree with it. Sure there are soma appalling things that have greatly tarnished their image in recent days but They believe they still have a lot to be proud of, and that's fair enough too - they do.

You also need to realise that while you don't like hearing America "glorified" (to use your term) that most likely Americans don't like hearing their country slagged off. Both emotions are equally legitimate. Now seeing as we like to allow a modicum of freedom of expression here both things are likely to happen, and both sides will likely have to live with it.

These are just words on a message board. If these issues genuinely upset us then we shouldn't be here. Self control please. Cheers mate. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Azred]

What was the topic again? [img]graemlins/1ponder.gif[/img] Oh, yes...the American captive who got beheaded.

Every war throughout all of human history has had civilian casualties, because that happens during wars. At least no legitimate army these days specifically targets civilians to kill. Therein lies a huge problem--when you know you are facing terrorists, insurgents, or whatever you wish to call them, how can you tell a civilian from an insurgent? You can't! Vietnam revisited....

No one should excuse anyone involved in the abuses of Iraqi detainees; courts-martial for all the perpetrators, regardless of rank, is needed. However, which crime is worse: humiliation, torture, or death? At least dignity and health may be recovered....

Terrorists understand only one language: violence. They may cloak themselves under the guise of religion or some political agenda, but they want nothing more than to shoot guns and kill people. Trying to deal with these rabid dogs with rules, regulations, democracy, or "the moral high ground" is simply a waste of energy. The only effective way to deal with them is to raise the price of poker and see how long they are willing to play.
This view of mine has nothing to do with the unfortunate man who lost his head; I have had this view for quite some time, because I have never seen or heard of anyone successfully negotiating with a terrorist to any positive outcome.

My country isn't perfect; in fact, we have our own terrorists--the problem of the collective Neo-Nazis must be dealt with someday, before another Oklahoma City happens (or worse). However, we do represent the culmination of centuries of social and political development; thus, we are the best answer discovered so far. Some people don't like this, but their dislike of this fact doesn't invalidate its truth; likewise, their acceptance of this fact is not a prerequisite for its truth. *shrug* Jealous, I suppose.... [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]

[The Hierophant]

Originally posted by Azred: My country isn't perfect; in fact, we have our own terrorists--the problem of the collective Neo-Nazis must be dealt with someday, before another Oklahoma City happens (or worse). However, we do represent the culmination of centuries of social and political development; thus, we are the best answer discovered so far. Some people don't like this, but their dislike of this fact doesn't invalidate its truth; likewise, their acceptance of this fact is not a prerequisite for its truth. *shrug* Jealous, I suppose.... [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]

Hahaha! So your country is the best in the world and anyone that doesn't agree is just jealous? If I thought you were joking then it wouldn't be bad at all, in fact I'd have a laugh along with you. But, judging from the overall tone of your post (and the general nature of your posting history) you're probably being serious. In which case...
[img]graemlins/1puke.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/1puke.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/1puke.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/1puke.gif[/img]

And that's all I can muster the strength to say after vomitting so violently for so long...

[Skunk]

Originally posted by Azred: Terrorists understand only one language: violence. They may cloak themselves under the guise of religion or some political agenda, but they want nothing more than to shoot guns and kill people. Trying to deal with these rabid dogs with rules, regulations, democracy, or "the moral high ground" is simply a waste of energy. The only effective way to deal with them is to raise the price of poker and see how long they are willing to play.

Matching force for force is one thing - but we should not be setting the lead in committing abuses and should attempt to show the morally englightened way of doing things wherever possible.

Bear in mind that:
"between 70 percent and 90 percent" of the detainees in Iraq "had been arrested by mistake." (Associated press)
Given that the bulk of those that we detain are both innocent and harmless, we should make it a matter of priority to treat them with the dignity and humanity that they deserve (at least until we have definitive evidence to the contrary) - or risk driving them into supporting/joining the very terrorists that we are seeking to stop.

[promethius9594]

"between 70 percent and 90 percent" of the detainees in Iraq "had been arrested by mistake." (Associated press)

well, coming from a newspaper that seems to advocate feeding steak and eggs to the prisoners before awarding them cash prizes for killing the kurds, i guess we'll have to call that figure dubious at best.

solitary confinement is against the geneva convention? BS. im calling that one right now, cus i can smell it even from here. what are they going to do, hurt themselves? international red cross can bite me for all i care... they blow everything out of proportion anyway.

[shamrock_uk]

Well, given the US has just released half of them from Abu-Grahib that figure must be at least 50%. None of them have been charged with any crime. And the AP quote was taken from the Red Cross report which in turn quoted US intelligence officials.

[Faceman]

Originally posted by promethius9594: "between 70 percent and 90 percent" of the detainees in Iraq "had been arrested by mistake." (Associated press) well, coming from a newspaper that seems to advocate feeding steak and eggs to the prisoners before awarding them cash prizes for killing the kurds, i guess we'll have to call that figure dubious at best. solitary confinement is against the geneva convention? BS. im calling that one right now, cus i can smell it even from here. what are they going to do, hurt themselves? international red cross can bite me for all i care... they blow everything out of proportion anyway.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't AP a news agency (like Reuters) rather than a newspaper?
Also, aren't people "innocent until proven guilty" anymore?

[ 05-15-2004, 08:55 AM: Message edited by: Faceman ]

[Azred]

Originally posted by Skunk: Matching force for force is one thing - but we should not be setting the lead in committing abuses and should attempt to show the morally englightened way of doing things wherever possible.

Based on all the information that has been coming from Iraq in the last several months we are certainly not setting the lead for committing abuses, unless we have also beheaded people or set their corpses on fire.
The terrorists in Iraq, or anywhere for that matter, don't really care about anyone's "morally enlightened" way of doing things. Petting a rabid dog only gets you bitten.

Originally posted by Skunk: Given that the bulk of those that we detain are both innocent and harmless, we should make it a matter of priority to treat them with the dignity and humanity that they deserve (at least until we have definitive evidence to the contrary) - or risk driving them into supporting/joining the very terrorists that we are seeking to stop.

How do we know they are both innocent and harmless? Because a news service says that they are? Hmm...
Regardless, I agree that any detainees should have been treated humanely and in a manner that doesn't result in what would be mortifying embarrassment to an Arab male. This whole prison debacle has given us an almost insurmountable black eye; the best thing to do is to have 30 June get here quickly and get everybody the heck out of Dodge.