• Rick Perry defends Marines who urinated on dead bodies
    100 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Bryanrocks0;34234924]It's not all Americans, mind you.[/QUOTE] I like how you felt obliged to inform him the obvious
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;34234922]This is 3-4 people doing this. We have several thousand troops stationed in Afghanistan. You can't judge an entire country and it's forces by 3 people. I highly doubt Gunfox is endorsing what they're doing here, or that they're not in the wrong, only that the Geneva convention technically doesn't apply to them.[/QUOTE] I'm not just talking about this scenario, let's take ww2, shit ton of racist propaganda against the germans and the japanese, as a people, and japanese people being put in camps during that too. Let's take.. rick perry I think it was that wanted to nuke the entirety of iran if he gets elected. Let's take all the hindus etc that got murdered for being "towelheads" after 9/11. Do I need to go on?
While I can understand his opinion that "Kids do stupid stuff", adding to the fact that they are actively engaged in a combat zone in a foreign country (which adds to their stress), leading to irrational acts which are not positively viewed by society, his criticism of the federal government for "over-reacting" is absolutely groundless and foolish. What the marines did was obviously wrong, disgusting, and in violation of the Geneva Convention as aforementioned, and he therefore has no grounds to justify his claim of their over-reaction. He and other GOP party members criticize the government when they do not react strongly enough to certain issues, and when they do react strongly, they still criticize them. He's a troll with the main intention, specifically designated to try to make the Democrats look like the bad guys.
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;34234869]Are you endorsing war crimes against the Geneva convention? I don't understand why you're pointing this out.. the United States has a duty as world police to follow the Geneva convention and so far they have been doing this. What is your point?[/QUOTE] My point is that it isnt against the conventions. There is no other point. I don't like it when people claim stuff violates the conventions when it really doesn't.
[QUOTE=Crimor;34234986]I'm not just talking about this scenario, let's take ww2, shit ton of racist propaganda against the germans and the japanese, as a people, and japanese people being put in camps during that too. Let's take.. rick perry I think it was that wanted to nuke the entirety of iran if he gets elected. Let's take all the hindus etc that got murdered for being "towelheads" after 9/11. Do I need to go on?[/QUOTE] The political and social climate during WWII was pretty different compared to now. Racism wasn't looked down upon back then, so seeing those posters and the fear mongering wasn't anything new or wrong to us back then. We weren't putting the Japanese to death in these internment camps we had set up, we put them in there because we were at war with an entire nation, not a group of insurgents in a country half-way across the world. Putting them in camps wasn't the best idea obviously. As for Mr. perry, there will always be idiots, and idiots are attracted to politics, he is nothing new. McAuthor wanted to glass over North Korea during the Korean war, threats of nukes is nothing new either, but they will never be used or authorized.
[QUOTE=Crimor;34234889]What is it with americans and not having a shred of respect for the country they invade, the people in it, the people they're fighting, and what happens after they leave.[/QUOTE] Oh don't be an arrogant douche. I find the act of peeing on corpses to be a shameful one. I also find the widespread misuse of the conventions to be degrading to the treaty. [editline]15th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Contag;34234918]On moral level I don't think that's a reasonable response. Otherwise why bother respecting the law when pursuing criminals?[/QUOTE] I agree totally, I just disagree with the suggestion that the conventions apply.
[QUOTE=GunFox;34235126]Oh don't be an arrogant douche. I find the act of peeing on corpses to be a shameful one. I also find the widespread misuse of the conventions to be degrading to the treaty. [editline]15th January 2012[/editline] I agree totally, I just disagree with the suggestion that the conventions apply.[/QUOTE] I think it's not so much people saying the convention applies, but that it SHOULD apply, all it takes is a bit more warmongering president to start using biological warfare and white phosphorus in "wars" like this.
[QUOTE=GunFox;34235126]Oh don't be an arrogant douche. I find the act of peeing on corpses to be a shameful one. I also find the widespread misuse of the conventions to be degrading to the treaty. [editline]15th January 2012[/editline] I agree totally, I just disagree with the suggestion that the conventions apply.[/QUOTE] [quote] Art. 147. Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the present Convention: wilful killing, torture or [b]inhuman treatment[/b], including biological experiments, wilfully causing [b]great suffering or serious injury to body or health[/b], unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement of a protected person, compelling a protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in the present Convention, taking of hostages and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly. [/quote] Although not specifically geared towards [i]dead[/i] bodies, I think generally this may be what people are talking about? Source: Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 reflink: [url]http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/380[/url]
Gunfox isn't saying that it isn't a bad thing, and he definitely isn't saying that it isn't against the geneva convention, hes simply saying that the geneva convention doesn't apply to the insurgents/taliban. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld is a supreme court case that also backs this up a little bit. "The Geneva Convention is a treaty between nations and as such it does not confer individual rights and remedies." Another example is from Convention III, article II, Paragraph 3: "They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power,[B] [U]if[/U] [/B]the [party who wasn't present at the convention] accepts and applies the provisions thereof." Obviously they aren't accepting and applying the provisions.
Welp let's hope this tanks his campaign
[QUOTE=Prez;34235235]Although not specifically geared towards [i]dead[/i] bodies, I think generally this may be what people are talking about? Source: Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 reflink: [url]http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/380[/url][/QUOTE] More likely this (First Geneva Convention, Article 17) [quote]They shall further ensure that the dead are honourably interred, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, that their graves are respected, grouped if possible according to the nationality of the deceased, properly maintained and marked so that they may always be found.[/quote] But as GunFox said, it unfortunately doesn't apply here since the deceased were insurgents.
Jesus Rick Perry is just the worst type of fucking person.
Well he has a point, Churchill did order the Bismarck sunk while it was trying to surrender, but other than that, he's still an idiot trying to gain extreme right wing support by saying essentially "HURR DURR DEMOCRATS HATE OUR MILITARY"
I would seriously love to sit down with Rick Perry (even if he might try and passively get me lynched) and talk with him about these kinds of things. I think it'd be really interesting, even if I wouldn't get anywhere with him.
[QUOTE=Cone;34235748]I would seriously love to sit down with Rick Perry (even if he might try and passively get me lynched) and talk with him about these kinds of things. I think it'd be really interesting, even if I wouldn't get anywhere with him.[/QUOTE] That's why I love it when candidates go to colleges. College students are some of the most informed voters out there.
[QUOTE=Bryanrocks0;34235769]That's why I love it when candidates go to colleges. College students are some of the most informed voters out there.[/QUOTE] I haven't even made it past bloody Seniors school yet and I know who I'd vote for if I were a citizen.
[QUOTE=Nikota;34234589]Wait... Churchill pissed on bodies?[/QUOTE] [img]http://listverse.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/42301054-churchill-v-sign-416.jpg[/img] I should have known.
[QUOTE=Bryanrocks0;34235769]That's why I love it when candidates go to colleges. College students are some of the most informed voters out there.[/QUOTE] If I could ultra disagree with your post I would click the button 4 million times. This is blatantly untrue. One thing I learned about going through college is that college kids are fucking idiots.
The fucked up things Marines are forced to see and do in the line of duty should give them a wide latitude of what they can do to to enemy combatants. Pissing on a dead corpse is well within that latitude of allowance, especially since the insurgents they fight are no-holds-barred combatants and will do the most terrible shit to any Marine if they had the chance. Hell, you don't even have to be in the service, the Taliban kidnapped and murdered that one security contractor by [B]sawing his head off with a rusty hacksaw[/B] while he was still alive. I don't care what any piece of parchment says to do in a situation like that, those people are getting dead in the most inhumane way possible and going to be desecrated in all ways possible after death. Rick Perry is generally an idiot, but I agree with him that blowing something this benign out of proportion by anyone is idiotic.
[QUOTE=Crimor;34235212]I think it's not so much people saying the convention applies, but that it SHOULD apply, all it takes is a bit more warmongering president to start using biological warfare and white phosphorus in "wars" like this.[/QUOTE] It can't apply though, it only works if both parties agree (that is how it is set out). Take for example the Falkland conflict, it was respected by both sides during that to the point where an area was set out in international waters for hospital ships to dock. While the US / ISAF [I]should[/I] adhere to it in Afghanistan they have absolutely no legal requirement to do so.
[QUOTE=bohb;34236204]The fucked up things Marines are forced to see and do in the line of duty should give them a wide latitude of what they can do to to enemy combatants. Pissing on a dead corpse is well within that latitude of allowance, especially since the insurgents they fight are no-holds-barred combatants and will do the most terrible shit to any Marine if they had the chance. Hell, you don't even have to be in the service, the Taliban kidnapped and murdered that one security contractor by [B]sawing his head off with a rusty hacksaw[/B] while he was still alive. I don't care what any piece of parchment says to do in a situation like that, those people are getting dead in the most inhumane way possible and going to be desecrated in all ways possible after death. Rick Perry is generally an idiot, but I agree with him that blowing something this benign out of proportion by anyone is idiotic.[/QUOTE] this. though security contractors are usually ex-military, the taliban do really crazily nasty shit. One of those "torture teams" actually went so extreme the regular taliban excommunicated them.
[QUOTE=GunFox;34234755]And thereby it doesn't apply. It isn't a law. It is a treaty. They don't work for a government, so they don't have the ability to make treaties.[/QUOTE] Not sure where you're getting that from but in my course "Law of Armed Conflicts" there clearly states that you, as a soldier, NCO, CO have to respect the Geneva convention. Even if the government of the other party did not agree with the terms, you will be punished (by your own country) by breaking those rules. E.g. "playing dead" to avoid getting captured by the enemy is punishable with a prison sentence where I'm from, same goes for faking to surrender and faking a medical transport.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;34234922]This is 3-4 people doing this. We have several thousand troops stationed in Afghanistan. You can't judge an entire country and it's forces by 3 people. I highly doubt Gunfox is endorsing what they're doing here, or that they're not in the wrong, only that the Geneva convention technically doesn't apply to them.[/QUOTE] No, this is 3-4 people [i]who got caught[/i]. And that's on top of the numerous other scandals with troops that have come up in the past, plus all the incidents in the Wikileaked papers. It's a really pervasive problem, and it's important that it needs to be addressed not just because it's morally reprehensible (which it is) but because it [i]completely[/i] undermines the US mission in Afghanistan. You don't Win Hearts And Minds by desecrating corpses, brutalizing animals, and murdering civilians for fun. [QUOTE=bohb;34236204]The fucked up things Marines are forced to see and do in the line of duty should give them a wide latitude of what they can do to to enemy combatants. Pissing on a dead corpse is well within that latitude of allowance, especially since the insurgents they fight are no-holds-barred combatants and will do the most terrible shit to any Marine if they had the chance. Hell, you don't even have to be in the service, the Taliban kidnapped and murdered that one security contractor by [B]sawing his head off with a rusty hacksaw[/B] while he was still alive. I don't care what any piece of parchment says to do in a situation like that, those people are getting dead in the most inhumane way possible and going to be desecrated in all ways possible after death. Rick Perry is generally an idiot, but I agree with him that blowing something this benign out of proportion by anyone is idiotic.[/QUOTE] No. The "war is hell" excuse isn't going to cut it anymore. In World War 2 if a bunch of soldiers slaughtered some civilians, it was a moral failure. In Afghanistan if a bunch of soldiers slaughter some civilians, it's a [i]strategic failure[/i]. They are literally working at cross purposes to the war effort. If we're going to keep engaging in nation-building and interventionist policy the military is going to have to figure out how to train these jackasses [i]not to do this shit[/i].
[QUOTE=TH89;34236814]No, this is 3-4 people [i]who got caught[/i]. And that's on top of the numerous other scandals with troops that have come up in the past, plus all the incidents in the Wikileaked papers. It's a really pervasive problem, and it's important that it needs to be addressed not just because it's morally reprehensible (which it is) but because it [i]completely[/i] undermines the US mission in Afghanistan. You don't Win Hearts And Minds by desecrating corpses, brutalizing animals, and murdering civilians for fun. The "war is hell" excuse isn't going to cut it anymore. In World War 2 if a bunch of soldiers slaughtered some civilians, it was a moral failure. In Afghanistan if a bunch of soldiers slaughter some civilians, it's a [i]strategic failure[/i]. They are literally working at cross purposes to the war effort. If we're going to keep engaging in nation-building and interventionist policy the military is going to have to figure out how to train these jackasses [i]not to do this shit[/i].[/QUOTE] this shit will happen regardless... I would say it's semi-endemic in the mindset of the American military establishment
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;34236873]this shit will happen regardless... I would say it's semi-endemic in the mindset of the American military establishment[/QUOTE] You've just re-stated the existence of the problem as an argument for not trying to fix it. What?
[QUOTE=TH89;34236934]You've just re-stated the existence of the problem as an argument for not trying to fix it. What?[/QUOTE] the only effective solutions will be decreasing troop numbers and increasing troop quality, essentially making it a SOF war, what should have happened since the start. Violations like this will always happen when large amounts of conventional troops are deployed.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;34236995]Violations like this will always happen when large amounts of conventional troops are deployed.[/QUOTE] You know this how exactly? Keep in mind that "it always has" is not really an answer since no military has made a serious and concerted effort to address this problem before.
[QUOTE=TH89;34237047]You know this how exactly? Keep in mind that "it always has" is not really an answer since no military has made a serious and concerted effort to address this problem before.[/QUOTE] how? I'm pretty sure it can be attributed to the entire "people aren't perfect" thing, and "bad people will slip through the cracks" The british ran a successful COIN operation in the Malaysian Emergency through large-scale use of local troops, not of their own.
[QUOTE=Squad;34236167]If I could ultra disagree with your post I would click the button 4 million times. This is blatantly untrue. One thing I learned about going through college is that college kids are fucking idiots.[/QUOTE] Intelligence is awfully subjective anyway [editline]15th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=bohb;34236204]The fucked up things Marines are forced to see and do in the line of duty should give them a wide latitude of what they can do to to enemy combatants. Pissing on a dead corpse is well within that latitude of allowance, especially since the insurgents they fight are no-holds-barred combatants and will do the most terrible shit to any Marine if they had the chance. Hell, you don't even have to be in the service, the Taliban kidnapped and murdered that one security contractor by [B]sawing his head off with a rusty hacksaw[/B] while he was still alive. I don't care what any piece of parchment says to do in a situation like that, those people are getting dead in the most inhumane way possible and going to be desecrated in all ways possible after death. Rick Perry is generally an idiot, but I agree with him that blowing something this benign out of proportion by anyone is idiotic.[/QUOTE] Saying this isn't bad because worse things have happened in the line of action sounds like stupid reasoning.
Apparently there is such a thing as a republican troll. [url]http://nation.foxnews.com/rick-perry/2012/01/15/rick-perry-white-house-handling-marine-video-over-top[/url] "Why on earth is this jerk still running?" "get a life libtard...........:)>"
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.