Pissing Away the War on Terror
"The tide of war is receding," he lied.
The Taliban is pissed off at getting pissed on. After four U.S. Marines apparently urinated on the faces of their dead enemies in Afghanistan—and after the event was captured on video and spread on YouTube—the Taliban condemned the action as “inhuman.” And listen, if anyone knows inhuman it’s the Taliban.
The Obama administration made a great show of condemning the Marines’ actions. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta called the pissing “utterly deplorable,” and promised an investigation. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed “total dismay.”
In angry response, commentators and politicians on the right puffed up and got their macho on. “Shut your mouth. War is hell,” said the wonderful congressman and war hero Allen West wonderfully. The adorable pundit Dana Loesch added adorably, “I’d drop trou and do it too.”
But let’s face it, it is an infraction: the U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice forbids such shenanigans. The Corps must maintain decorum with its corpses. (For Obama supporters: that’s a joke, because corps and corpse are pronounced differently.)
Most organizations have a time-honored way of dealing with this sort of thing. In this case, some high-ranking superior officer ought to call the piss-men onto his hopefully plastic-covered carpet and say something to the effect of: “I rebuke thee! Go thou forth and urinate upon thine enemy no more.” After which, there would be a brief period of embarrassed feet-shuffling, a brisk and coordinated “Yes, sir!”and then off the chastised men would go to kill and piss on more Taliban, only without the video guy this time.
But the Obama administration can’t afford to behave with that sort of decency and common sense. They have to over-react—they have no choice. They are desperate to appease these Islamist murderers in order to hold together an attempt to negotiate a phony settlement with them. Only then can they pull our troops out of the country with some display of make-believe honor before the wild slaughter there starts again.
Okay, last time I said that I didn’t get challenged on Facebook concerning your articles anymore. Well, I spoke too soon. I spent all day trying to get people (four of them were text-shouting at me) to answer a simple question: Do muslims kill a lot more people in the name of Islam than Christians do in the name of Christianity? Then I sat and watched as every one of them dodged the question time and again, all the while insulting me and my references. Interesting world we live in because now those same four people will vehemently condemn pissing on the Taliban.
You need more intelligent Facebook friends!
I have at home a stack of those old Time Life books, several series on WWII. My father gave them to me years ago.
I remember years ago looking through one of them at the various pictures. I didn’t ‘read’ much of it at the time as the long, dry lists of names and statistics that the authors loved to fill pages with were not as interesting to me then as now. Anyway, one of the pictures left an impression on me I still remember. There was a half-page B/W photo taken by a correspondent during some point in the Battle of The Bulge. The photo focused on a bunch of litters that were laid out in rows by the road holding German wounded captured in the fighting with several American soldiers standing around. On the far left of the pic, though, an American serviceman was leaning down and handing a canteen to what was obviously a German soldier sitting up on a litter.
That struck me as odd at the time. I remember wondering ‘why would he do that? that’s a German guy.’ or something along those lines. I mean, I knew about the concentration camps at that time, so I couldn’t understand why he would be nice to him like that. It wasn’t until I was older that I understood.
According to the ‘manly men’ that fill these comment boxes, I would wager they would think those American G.I.s should have all whipped out their willies and instead urinated all over the dead and wounded.
When i first heard about this urinating on the Taliban dead story, I forced myself not to conclude anything on it. “What if,” I thought to myself, “These dead Taliban had just ambushed our men and killed several of their friends right in front of them? Would you, Mike, be able to control your rage in a situation like that?” While that wouldn’t make what they did just, it would lessen the severity quite a bit in my eyes.
Then I actually watched the video in question. You can still find it if you look. The British news sites still have it available in it’s entirety.
This is not some kind of revenge gesture. It has every mark of being the product of several guys who were bored and suddenly thought, hey, you know what would be funny?… Watch it if you don’t believe me.
But what truly mystifies me are the armchair yahoos who hoot and hollar “woohoo! P*ss on them tallybans! Do it some more!” and the like. The idea of not desecrating the dead, enemy or no, seems to be one of the several civilized concepts they were never taught.
And yet the hypocrisy! These same commentators who openly daydream about how awesome it would be if they had the chance to desecrate the body of a fallen enemy themselves would also be the first to express murderous outrage at the pictures of the contractors in Iraq who were pulled scorched from the SUVs and hung on the bridge for display, or pics of the brave snipers in Somalia who fought to the death being tied naked behind a jeep and drug through the dusty streets.
For them, desecration and immorality is only ‘wrong’ if the OTHER guy does it.
Very sad.
They desecrate living soldiers and yes probably the dead ones too. Payback sucks.
Never forget that our soldiers are killers. They wouldn’t be killing those people if they gave a damn what happened to them.
They broke the rules. Punish them for breaking the rules. Don’t punish them for not seeing the enemy as anything other than something lower than trash.
100% correct, but we are not in their shoes all yr. long…….war is bad, but
you just can’t please people all the time………..
they did get some ‘relief’
And your strongest ‘connection’ or backward ‘understanding’ of this incident is TIME magazine pictures..? Riiight.
Mike, I’d say your ZERO experience disqualifies your take altogether and places you into the ‘armchair yahoos’ category you spoke of.
No, it simply reminded me of the picture.
Yes, I am obviously not a manly-man like you. I see a pic like I described an am amazed that, after enduring incredible hardship, pain, fear, hunger and God knows what else, that a common soldier, not even the subject of the photo, still had the amazing strength of character to offer a defeated enemy at his mercy a drink from his own canteen.
I guess I’m not manly enough to look upon something like that and despise that soldier’s weakness like you can.
I don’t look at such things and wonder aloud “wait, why isn’t he p*ssing in his face?”
I guess the standard for what is ‘manly’ must have changed when I wasn’t paying attention.
I understand your point, but this is nothing new. If you could travel with Time-Life to the other side of the planet and watch the U.S. Marines dealing with dead and wounded Japanese, you might see a different attitude toward the fallen enemy.
Just because somebody’s trying to kill you, that doesn’t mean you must automatically regard him as the “gallant foe” who deserves to be treated with honor and respect. I would say that’s especially true of the Taliban, who treat captured and dead Marines with no respect at all. We try to hold the moral high ground, but our troops are the ones taking all the risks. They should be given some leeway – disciplined, certainly, but not hung out to dry in order to satisfy Muslim notions of honor or the “international community’s” sense of outrage.
Yes and no.
I know such activity is not new at all. I remember reading a side note about some very gross mistreatment of wounded and dead during the Civil War too.
“as the “gallant foe” who deserves to be treated with honor and respect.”
- Treating the wounded and dead, those who are totally at our mercy, in an honorable manner does NOT depend on the ‘gallantness’ of those individual. Just like we are not allowed to beat or mistreat even some of the most vile criminals in our own country.
“We try to hold the moral high ground, but our troops are the ones taking all the risks. They should be given some leeway – disciplined, certainly, but not hung out to dry in order to satisfy Muslim notions of honor or the “international community’s” sense of outrage.”
- I pretty much agree. My main point in this regard is that this was not something that just happened out on the field, and then some officer found out about it later and chewed them out. This was a VERY public act. Blame the soldiers themselves for that.
Think of it like this: Suppose a junior man directly insults a high ranking officer. Maybe he’s had a few too many, or is REALYL angry about something. In private, I’m willing to bet that said officer would ‘take care’ of the matter quietly and that would be that.
Now image the same thing, but instead the loudmouth roars his insults in the middle of the mess hall, or records it an puts it on YouTube. This is now a TOTALLY different matter. Allowed to stand without public action taken set’s a terrible precedent for discipline AT BEST.
Mike,
You are simplistic and en-experienced. The world is more complicated than a single black and picture from the past..there is a thing called “context” you obviously dont grasp.
If the “germans” were on stretchers/litters neatly arranged by the roadside among American forces, the fighting that wounded them was obviously long over.
The American GI so kindly handing him a canteen was PROBABLY a Medical Corps soldier, specifically tasked with TRANSPORTING AND CARING FOR those enemy wounded. Perhaps, as part of a larger surrender agreement by which the Germans would agree to capture upon the promise of decent treatment for their wounded.
Different scenario than, say The Malmady Massacre, and how THOSE germans would (should!) have been treated if caught at the scene by American combat troops.
Which brings me to the next level of ignorance you suffer from:
“For them, desecration and immorality is only ‘wrong’ if the OTHER guy does it”.
Desecration can actually be DESERVED you know.
You can actually BE such a filthy murdering scumbag that you DESERVE some rough treatment when caught, or killed.
Child rapists, Taliban, and SS Troopers come to mind.
Its called “context”
Sometimes referred to as “justice”.
“The Malmady Massacre, and how THOSE germans would (should!) have been treated if caught at the scene by American combat troops.”
- Because nothing says “GO USA!” like imitating the SS. You didn’t think that through did ya?
“Desecration can actually be DESERVED you know.”
- No, it can’t.
“You are simplistic and en-experienced. The world is more complicated than a single black and picture from the past..there is a thing called “context” you obviously dont grasp.”
To which I respond: ‘Morality is always dreadfully complicated to a man who has lost all his principles.’ – G. K. Chesterton
Google…”Angel of Marie’s Heights”
“Because nothing says “GO USA!” like imitating the SS. You didn’t think that through did ya?”
Uh, Yeah, I did…the deliberate murder of surrendered soldiers removes any moral requirement in treating their MURDERERS with mercy they do not DESERVE.
In order to DESERVE fair and decent treatment as an honorable soldier faithfully carrying out the Political will of his leadership, their is the requirement to CONDUCT YOURSELF in a manor worthy of of such treatment.
The SS, by murdering surrendered US soldiers (and countless unarmed civilians, including entire French Villages earlier in the war)effectively, and justly removed themselves of the protection afforded honorable soldiers.
By killing such murderers, we are not “imitating” the SS, we are bringing them to justice. That such simple cause and effect relationships give you trouble is rather disturbing
Quite a simple slam dunk case closed issue to anyone a modicum of historical reading.
Time/Life was the magazine most infiltrated by communists during that time. While I agree that the pissing incident was uncalled for, I can’t equate it to a picture in an old WWII Time/Life magazine showing compassion for an enemy soldier. First, the implication that the war being fought then was righteous and the war being fought now is not so much. Second, try looking at the occasional photos we get from Iraq and Iran showing our troops being kind to their enemies after the conflict and see that nothing has really changed in war. A whole range of emotions are greatly intensified during war. Compassion, anger, revenge, mirth, sadness, sexual feelings all are greatly magnified because of the one great emotion, fear. Our fighting men live with it, so we don’t have to.
The picture of the WWII veteran was in a conventional war, both sides openly fighting for their country. If you wish an accurate comparison, try Taliban = Nazi SS.
Only a small minority of Germans were SS (Nazis), most were just drafted and lied to.
I doubt the allied soldier would have offered a drink to a Josef Mengele, or a Herman Hess.
Once again, for the slow people out there, urinating on the enemy dead is NOT desecration. Please go look up the word. Desecration is mutilating the body, like taking the left ear, or dragging the corpse through the streets, or rending it into many pieces.
Urinating on the corpse is dishonoring it, but it is not desecration. Do not buy into the lies of the enemy, foreign or domestic.
I see you’re from the Bill Clinton school of grammer.
Desecrate: to treat with sacrilege; profane. To violate or outrage the sacred character of.
I’m not sure what definition you’re using in this case. Whatever it is, it wouldn’t pass muster in the U.S. manual for the law of land warfare. There it talks quite a bit about the respect that must be shown to the enemy dead. While your ‘excuse’ may please chest thumpers around there, it wouldn’t play out well.
Also, if you are a Christian, I wonder even more at your cheerleading for this act.
“Do not buy into the lies of the enemy, foreign or domestic.”
- Ah, so pointing out that what these men did was not only morally wrong, but a violation of the regs of warfare (in which the military code of justice agrees with me. look them up.) makes me an ‘enemy’?
Why don’t you go back to playing Call of Duty, ok? You don’t belong in any serious discussion.
Nice job Mike
Your own argument defeats your position.
“..To violate or outrage the sacred character of”
Nothing “sacred” about the “character” of the Taliban.
Quite the contrary, they are scum to be reviled.
Pissing on them does not “Desecrate” them.
Their very existance dececrates the world.
We are all made in the image and likeness of God. We do not treat in immoral manner the bodies of the dead, friend or enemy. The uniform code of military justice is on my side in this as well.
If you want to use your personal hatred as an excuse for promoting something as vile as desecration of the dead, then there is little for you and I to discuss, as you have left reason behind long ago.
Get off your high horse and stop aiding the enemy with your false indignation,
Troll.
War sucks, shit happens. The minor hazing at Abu Grahib was nothing compared to what they do. Pissing on a dead body was nothing compared to what they do.
Minor incident nothing.
Barely noticeable nothing.
Stop holding our side to the Impossible Alinski Standard of Perfection, while ignoring who we’re fighting and what they do. They deserve a little contempt, and some less than Perfect Decorum by the guys risking their lives fighting them is no big deal…and you dare you criticize them from the safety of your mothers basement.
Pathetic.
“Get off your high horse and stop aiding the enemy with your false indignation.”
- There is nothing false about my indignation.
“Troll.”
- Yes, because anyone who disagrees with your gleeful promotion of desecration as something that is laudable is automatically a ‘troll’.
The minor hazing at Abu Grahib”
- Minor hazing… Kind of reminds me of the manicure malfunctions our downed pilots went through while guests of the NVA. And who can forget the bumper-surfing accident our brave snipers had after dying in Somalia…
“Pissing on a dead body was nothing compared to what they do.”
- Again, your logic is false. Pointing out a greater evil doesn’t suddenly make something else unrelated NO evil. Perhaps Manson’s defense should have simply said “Hey, it’s not like he’s evil like HITLER or something!” I guess you’d say that would vindicate him? Afterall, I think we can both agree that Manson killed FAR fewer than Hitler, right? That totally absolves his crime of any moral wrongness!
“Barely noticeable nothing.”
- It was barely noticeable. What IS noticeable, however, is the ghoulish cheerleading squad of degenerates who want desecration promoted as a positive thing and taken to levels that wouldn’t even make the cut in a Quentin Tarantino movie. Have you READ what some of the commentators on this page fantasize about doing?
“Stop holding our side to the Impossible Alinski Standard of Perfection”
- Expecting them to abide by the rules of conduct that THEY agreed to is an ‘impossible alinski standard’? Alinsky wrote the manual for the conduct of US Forces in wartime?
“while ignoring who we’re fighting and what they do.”
- We can fight and defeat our enemies without becoming like them. What you are implying is a false choice.
“and you dare you criticize them from the safety of your mothers basement.”
- Ah yes, I say that desecration of the dead is a moral evil and that automatically means I live in my parents’ basement. I thought only liberals argued like that. Apparently you have taken the ‘sink to your enemy’s level’ to heart, even in political discussion.
“Troll” is the correct term for this “Mike”…..and, he re-enforces that by each of his argumentaive, chip-on-the-shoulder responses here.
Reminds me of another poster under another blogger’s comments.
Mike, you’re comparing apples and oranges. A wounded guy crying for a drink of water and an enemy corpse are different.
Urinating on a thirsty, suffering man would be an evil act. What these guys did to corpses was stupid, not evil. Making a video and uploading it was super-stupid.
Corpse desecration shouldn’t be dismissed out-of-hand. The Russians buried a bunch of Chechnyan terrorists wrapped in the corpses of pigs, a good idea. They think they won’t enjoy their virgins in heaven if their corpses are contaminated with “haram”. Desecrating suicide-bomber corpses with pork oil should be a matter of policy – it could SAVE LIVES by discouraging such leaps for heaven.
Genghis Khan used corpse desecration strategically. After a battle, his men would chop off the heads of the enemy dead and pile them into mounds. This made ritual burial impossible. Best to surrender and ask for mercy.
“Urinating on a thirsty, suffering man would be an evil act. What these guys did to corpses was stupid, not evil. Making a video and uploading it was super-stupid.”
- No, both are evil acts. Would you consider the same basis for comparison if the roles of marines/taliban had been reversed. I very much doubt it.
“Corpse desecration shouldn’t be dismissed out-of-hand.”
- Yes, by civilized men, it should be.
“The Russians buried a bunch of Chechnyan terrorists wrapped in the corpses of pigs, a good idea.”
- The Russians also have an extensive track record for a fertile range of brutality, the reading of which is not for the squeamish, which they when called on it they excuse in the same manner you do now. They are no better a model to emulate on this topic than the Taliban.
“They think they won’t enjoy their virgins in heaven if their corpses are contaminated with “haram”.”
- Perhaps some think that way, many others don’t. I’ve made this point in another subject where I drew a hypothetical comparison of Taliban saying they will break captured American Christians by making them eat steak on Friday. It betrays a lack of understanding of the enemy. I would also remind you that Islam considers alcohol/our music etc to be evil. Yet, the 9/11 terrorists spent the previous evening downing booze and being serviced by strippers.
“Genghis Khan used corpse desecration strategically. After a battle, his men would chop off the heads of the enemy dead and pile them into mounds. This made ritual burial impossible. Best to surrender and ask for mercy.”
- He also used rape and enslavement strategically. An amoral case could be made for both of those as well. But we can’t do that. We MUST abide by the moral law. Otherwise, we must simply admit to barbarism.
I’m not getting something…….
Not dishonouring the dead isn’t anything you do for them, it’s done for the image and valour of the corp. Superior soldiers have discipline and self-control, that’s all there’s to it. Besides, taking a slash on the enemy is strategically and tactically stupid. Why do you want to give them incentive to work harder at blowing your legs off next time?…….
You DO know that the Allied line troops frequently shot prisoners when it too inconvenient to detach troops to take them back to rear?
That troops in the PTO occasionally sent the skulls of dead Japs back to their loved ones to make ashtrays?
There are other “interesting” stories, but I don’t have time to add ‘em.
“You DO know that the Allied line troops frequently shot prisoners when it too inconvenient to detach troops to take them back to rear?”
- I would argue with ‘frequently’, but yes, I am fully aware that it happened. I know ears were taken, fingers, even reports of scalps, rapes, torture and murder of civilians, desecration and looting of churches, etc. There are even reports of this kind of behavior in the American Revolutionary War. As I mentioned in a previous comment, this kind of thing is as old as war itself.
Barbarism and immorality are not new to the 21st Century. They are as old as man.
What is fairly new to me, it seems, is the ghoulish delight so many seem take in these acts. Just look through the rest of the comments here to see lots of examples of people fantasizing about the violations they would not only like to visit upon the dead and living, but wish for official government SUPPORT and APPROVAL for these acts.
But then again, from what I hear, those “Saw” movies that come out every year make a lot of money. Perhaps many people are starting to view torture and violation as something… normal, God help us.
But what truly mystifies me are the armchair yahoos who hoot and hollar “woohoo! P*ss on them tallybans! Do it some more!” and the like. The idea of not desecrating the dead, enemy or no, seems to be one of the several civilized concepts they were never taught.
So true. I doubt the families of the 4 French soldiers killed by an Afghan “ally” who says he was outraged by the pictures are making light of pissing on the enemy. Also the Marines who did it and then filmed it(!) are typical of the narcissism of the Facebook generation. The reaction from conservatives, like their stupid decision to vote for Gingrich in SC, appears to be motivated by hatred of the media. Hating the media is understandable but knee-kerk temper tantrums aren’t going to help their cause.
Generalize much?
So ALL SC Conservatives are in Gingrich’s camp/hip pocket?
I’m no Gingrich cheerleader and am disappointed he’s trying to market himself as a ‘Goldwater Conservative’.
Though Jules, whether you’d care to admit, come to terms with or acknowledge, Gingrich has been one of the few candidates who have taken the media to task. And owned them in the process.
I don’t know your voting record though by your tone you may be an individual who voted for a guy in ’08 whose ahem ‘experience’, ‘transparency’, ‘intellect’ etc., leave MUCH to be desired for.
And as such he’s (as well as his ‘flock’ of dwindling believers) thee living/breathing embodiment of a grossly unqualified ideologue.
If you hadn’t pulled the lever or not an Uhbama supporter my apologies for assuming otherwise.
“I doubt the families of the 4 French soldiers killed by an Afghan “ally” who says he was outraged by the pictures are making light of pissing on the enemy”
you don’t find it at all odd that he regarded a non-lethal act of disrespect toward enemy soldiers he has himself presumably been trained to kill as cause to slaughter his own “allies,” trainers and benefactors?
“you don’t find it at all odd that he regarded a non-lethal act of disrespect toward enemy soldiers he has himself presumably been trained to kill as cause to slaughter his own “allies,” trainers and benefactors?”
- We have to remember that he was not an American. While I would certainly find such behavior by an American, or any westerner for that matter to be a bit startling, I’m not quite ready to assume that he thought about it in the same way we do. In a land where blood feuds over insults can last generations, I don’t think we can use our usual standards for what is ‘normal’.
“We have to remember that he was not an American. While I would certainly find such behavior by an American, or any westerner for that matter to be a bit startling, I’m not quite ready to assume that he thought about it in the same way we do. In a land where blood feuds over insults can last generations, I don’t think we can use our usual standards for what is ‘normal’.” Your explanation is condecensing to all. Ameriacan must understand that the Afgans are primative. Blame the victims exonerate the murder. Your logic can be applied to all of the actions taken by the 9/11 terrorists. By your logic they were justified. If you take a closer examination of the murder’s excuse, Muslim terrorist have used it for every action, like throwing acid in girls faces for going to school or not walking around like a laundry pile.
To the point of the original post, the marines must be disciplined not for the negative effect it might have on our enemies, but because emulating the enemy, makes us them. The incident should be left to the Marine Corps.
*facepalm*
Did reading comprehension just get thrown out of schools once I left?
“Blame the victims exonerate the murder. Your logic can be applied to all of the actions taken by the 9/11 terrorists. By your logic they were justified.”
- And I blamed the victims…. how? Care to share with us the logical progression you used to light up that dusty lightbulb?
No, you missed my entire point. The other commentator said “you don’t find it at all odd that he regarded a non-lethal act of disrespect toward enemy soldiers he has himself presumably been trained to kill as cause to slaughter his own “allies,” trainers and benefactors?”
The point to response to this was that to an American, yes, such behavior is very weird, but Afghans are most likely to see things totally different than we would on this case.
Were you to, say, insult my manhood, I would simply laugh and ignore you. In some countries they would kill you for it.
The (rather obvious) point? Just because it seems like weird behavior to us doesn’t mean it’s weird to them. Not every person on the planet is an American. I would think that point is kind of obvious to everyone.
“While I would certainly find such behavior by an American, or any westerner for that matter to be a bit startling…”
We’re talking about murder, Mike. An Afghan, supposedly not Taliban, murders four French soldiers because American soldiers urinated on Taliban corpses, and you say maybe it’s a culture thing.
Like suttee? You know, how the Hindus used to toss the widow on her husband’s funeral pyre. Or cannibalism – some cultures just have peculiar dietary requirements. Or Nanking raping? Hey it’s a Japanese thing.
If you don’t believe in the moral absolute that murder is wrong for everybody, maybe you’re an atheist. But if you’re an atheist, why do you care about corpses – aren’t they just garbage?
“An Afghan, supposedly not Taliban, murders four French soldiers because American soldiers urinated on Taliban corpses, and you say maybe it’s a culture thing.”
- Yes, but you failed to understand what I was saying in my post.
My point (and this is the third time I’ve explained it, so please pay attention this time) is NOT that he was justified in what he did, but that the ‘weirdness’ of it no longer becomes ‘weirdness’ if one remembers we are talking about the reaction of an Afghan instead of an American.
Afghanistan is indeed very backward. The idea of killing someone over an insult is foreign and repugnant to us Americans, as it should be. But to Afghan tribesmen, who can carry blood feuds between families and clans for GENERATIONS over insults, such a reaction is not that ‘weird’.
Ah, Leftspeak be known!
“We have to remember that he was not an American…I don’t think we can use our usual standards for what is ‘normal’ ”
Ladies and gentleman, meet the TEXTBOOK example of The Soft Bigotry Of Low Expectations.
Practiced by apologetic liberals in every race riot, affirmative action program, capital punishment excuse, and Muslim atrocity commited world wide.
We cant expect “them” to control themselves, act civilized, or be held accountable for their actions, because they’re “different”
Its all OUR fault the behave the way they do.
Mike in KC, are you sure youre not from “Baston” you talk like a “Havad” man.
Ladies and gentlemen, behold more proof that public schools have failed our children, at least when it comes to reading comprehension.
What, were there not enough pictures for you to understand it?
Try reading the post directly above yours that I made.
Uh, I went to Catholic School, not your Commie Publick Union Bum edumiation senter…
Critical thinking..I know they dont teach it anymore, but you really should try it someday.
You’ll be able to distinguish things, like, oh, I dunno…a harmless soldiers prank from an agonizing slow torturous death with a rusty knife sawing through your throat while youre fully conscious and their gleefully filming your agony to torture your family with later on.
You know, the little stuff you currently equate as “the same thing” between us and them.
Critical. Thinking.
Try it someday.
“Uh, I went to Catholic School”
I stopped reading your comment at this point. I also went to Catholic school, where the basis was laid for much of what I’m saying here. Given the barbarism you advocate, you obviously didn’t pay attention.
As much as I want our guys to humiliate the enemy (much like how I do it when I play modern warfare 2/3), they follow a rigid code of values…pissing on the enemy can only me metaphorical, unfortunately.
If the left decides to crucify those soldiers…well…it’s unfortunate but not out of the ordinary
there are protocols for these kind of actions and none of them include crucifying the soldiers or justifying the slaughter of our or our allied troops
But that’s the problem here, it’s not up to the left to punish these men. It’s up to their commanding officer. Though ultimately that is Obama, it shouldn’t be. They did something stupid, they should be punished. But, it should not go beyond the unit commander. Obama should have said that “It was unfortunate and a mistake and I’m sure their commanding officers will punish them appropriately”.
Way too much has been made, and regrettably is still being made of that “pissing on the dead Taliban video”. It happened. Get over it.
The Secy of State is not competent to comment on much of anything, and should’ve kept completely out of it; and the Secy of Defense, who should’ve known better, only gave our Islamist enemies a propaganda opportunity…..exploited to the hilt.
We Americans need to get back to our Job #1 of killing our Islamist enemy’s leaders, and as many of their uniformless foot soldiers as possible.
That’s what wars do. That’s what our Islamist enemy wants to do to us Americans…..right this hour….why don’t we take take them at their oft-repeated – over and over and over again – word?
Here’s the problem:
If this had been something that happened in the field, and then dealt with then and there (as I’m sure has happened before), I don’t think much WOULD be made of it.
HOWEVER.
Recording it and then throwing it up on a totally PUBLIC forum changes the dynamic. Whatever happens needs to be made public as well. If you don’t like it, blame the troops who did it. They were the idiots that recorded it and then threw it out on YouTube.
“That’s what our Islamist enemy wants to do to us Americans…..right this hour….why don’t we take take them at their oft-repeated – over and over and over again – word?”
- I think it depends on who you’re talking about. bin laden’s network has been pretty much destroyed for good in Afghanistan, if our intelligence services are correct, and I seriously don’t think the Taliban tribesmen daydream about marching on New York or even coming over here to fight us. if we are to take THEM at their word, they want us out of the country.
” if we are to take THEM at their word, they want us out of the country.”
yeah the great satan america invaded their country for no reason. they are just fighting the evil invaders.
That is EXACTLY how they see it.
Pray tell me, was it the Taliban that brought the towers down?
I was in favor of going in to take out Al Quaida and get or kill bin Laden. Now that our intelligence services have stated that the organization is for all intents and purposes destroyed in Afghanistan, and bin Laden dead, why bother to remain there? There’s no reason to keep fighting. We accomplished what we originally went there to do. Pull out and let the local tribes go back to their usual routine of shooting each other. Why should it be any concern of our?
I agree with your basic point. However, although the Taliban may not have “brought down the towers,” they provided aid and comfort, and a base of operations, to the man and organization that DID bring down the towers. That’s why we’re fighting them – to make sure they don’t take power in Afghanistan and allow the country to serve, again, as a base for terrorists. We leave, the weak, dysfunctional Afghan government falls to the Taliban, and AQ gets a haven in which to reconstitute itself.
I can’t say “Problem solved, let’s go home.” The trouble is, the problem will never be solved. We can’t eradicate the Taliban – as long as there are half a dozen of them hiding in the bushes, they’ll keep fighting. So what’s the solution? Stay in Afghanistan forever? At some point, we have to say “enough is enough” and get out of there. Sure, it’s a roll of the dice. But it’s better than eternal war against an enemy who won’t die.
I don’t think the problem can be ‘solved’, I agree. My point is that our original intent is complete.
As for the Taliban, if our own intelligence service is to be believed, they would actually rather go back to their petty feuds and killing each other over who gets to supply the most heroin to Eastern Europe.
We stay, we WILL bleed out, both actual blood and treasure. Both would be better spent elsewhere.
“Pray tell me, was it the Taliban that brought the towers down?”
No, Mike, it wasnt “the Taliban”…
It was belief in Mohammad, and the carrying out of His Will,
that brought The Towers down.
Same thing that blows up christian churces in Nigeria…Massacres hundreds of school children in Belsan…molests female reoprters in Egypt…Drove the DC Snipers actions…drove Major Hassan at frt Hood, drove the Shoe, underwear, and times square bombers, and motivated attacks on recruiter stations, and every other despicable atrocity that emenates from that particular “religion of peace”.
Mohammad and his followers are at war with the rest of the world, WORLD WIDE.
They all SAY so, and their sacred scriptures ARE irrefutable in their clear and consistant message to DO so…
Therefore, Mike, I’m willing to take their WORDS and their SCRIPTURE and their DEEDS at face value, rather than invent some imaginary, unproven “data wont support the hypothesis” myth that we’d all be safe from them, if we’d just “leave them alone.”
It aint gonna happen, Mike.
Not because I say so, but because MOHAMMAD SAYS SO.
Coffee.
SMELL it, OK?
“The Secy of State is not competent to comment on much of anything..”
Nope…she sure wishes that she had the proper tools to use though….everyone I know ( including Billy Clinton ) knows why she banned mini skirts in the WH.
What Jules and a lot of progressive, modern, educated thinkers don’t get is this: killing does not come easy for a typical western person. It is necessary to overcome a lot of cultural baggage. It is necessary for the soldier to believe that it is right and proper and heroic to shoot and kill a Taliban terrorist.
And don’t we?
So what’s left is paradox. Absurdity. Lunacy. How can you believe that the enemy deserves to have his skull ripped in two by a Hellfire missile, but putting urine on the corpse is obscene?
It is true that war truly can screw up a man’s head.
To take the point closer to home, imagine yourself being attacked in the street by a thug trying to take your life. The law, both civil (almost everywehre) and the moral law state that even if it means killing the man, you can use whatever force is necessary to save your life.
Once he has been stopped, or even killed, why not p*ss on him too? Why not even take an ear for a trophy?
Afterall, how can you think someone deserves to have his heart blasted to pieces and shot out his back by several 115gr. HPs, but then think it wrong to desecrate his corpse?
Your problem is you are not even attempting to view it as a moral act. You are attempting to clutter up the question with lots of vivid images and emotions in order to avoid judging an action based on moral ground. This is not an honest way of determining the morality of anything, as the same technique can be used (and is used) to try to clutter up analysis of ANY odious act that someone wants to conceal the barbaric nature of.
Because subduction of a criminal is completed once he is beaten. Subduction of the enemy is not done once a combatant is subdued, the enemy remains. Try to argue apples and apples. If killing is okay in war but not in civilian life, there must be some moral differences involved. We are at war with the Taliban because the Taliban have enabled terrorists to kill thousands of American citizens who had never even seen a Taliban person. I don’t agree with any of your posts, but I am willing to fight for your right to say what you want about it. And that is a tradition that most of us recognize and live by in order to keep the freedoms that we still have. If you won’t fight for your freedoms you will see your pacifist ideal come true. Of course, you will be living as a servant of your government and you will also be living in abject poverty in exchange for your cooperation.
“Because subduction of a criminal is completed once he is beaten.”
- Not always true. If it were true, there would be no such thing as a repeat offender.
“If killing is okay in war but not in civilian life, there must be some moral differences involved.”
- It is not quite so stark, and yes, there are moral difference involved. Not all killing in war is moral (it is immoral to target civilians) and it is sometimes moral to kill in civilian life (if it is necessary to defend your own life from attack).
“If you won’t fight for your freedoms you will see your pacifist ideal come true.”
- Uhm… Why would you think I’m a pacifist? How does that even logically follow, if you’ve bothered to read my posts. Is a desire to NOT desecrate the dead a mark of pacifism? I don’t get your logic here.
“Not all killing in war is moral (it is immoral to target civilians)”
I wonder why then more allied commanders and troops weren’t tried at Nuremberg too?
If so called “civilians” give aid and comfort to an enemy…they’re not neutral any longer.
Not all who intentionally violate the innocent face justice in this world, it is true.
If killing civilians is to be considered a-ok now, since they are ‘providing aid and comfort’, we need to quit saying that the German fire bombing of civilian targets in London was wrong.
“(I)t is immoral to target civilians”. Is that in the Bible? Joseph Mengele was a civilian.
The Germans started the aerial bombardment of population centers in WWI with their blimps over England. The Japanese turned their artillery on residential neighborhoods in Shanghai in 1937. (Geez, Oliver Cromwell’s still blamed for sacking cities that didn’t surrender – something quite customary at the time.)
Our soldiers in WWI and WWII, not to mention Korea and Vietnam, were largely draftees – the next thing to civilians. Moral to target them?
And what about combatants in mufti hiding among civilians? If we just blasted the buildings they were hiding in, couldn’t we get get psy ops or somebody to make the case that the “collateral damage” was the illegal combatants’ fault?
These silly absolutes tie our hands and get us nowhere. We need confidence in our civilization and our mission – then we need to plot the shortest, surest course to victory, and take it.
retlaw,
Your problem is that you come from the school of ‘if they did it, then we can do it too.’
No, moral evil doesn’t become justified for one party because someone else did it first. If we’re going to play that game, then we should simply throw out the entire moral law, as at some point in history, just about every form of evil has been committed, and if you’re looking for ‘justification’ to commit an objective evil like you’re looking for, you’re going to find it.
“For them, desecration and immorality is only ‘wrong’ if the OTHER guy does it.”
And you also miss the point, Mike. It is not hypocrisy at all. There is no balance here. They are the enemy. To kill them, brutally, horribly, viciously, is not immoral at all, because each time a terrorist dies the world improves a little bit.
On the other hand, we don’t deserve to die. Unless you believe in that Westboro crap.
They deserve it. That’s why we do it. They deserve far more, but we restrain ourselves in the hopes of sparing those who don’t fight.
Again, they deserve to die. Why get bent out of shape over a much smaller thing? It’s not hypocrisy- when THEY do it to US they are doing it to people who DID NOT DESERVE IT.
No, Swami, I didn’t miss the point. It is YOU who is missing the point of my entire post.
KILLING enemy fighters in a war is NOT what I was talking about. DESECRATION OF THE DEAD is what I was talking about. However, that was a VERY impressive straw man you knocked down…
One can make a good case to point out that killing a declared enemy in war can increase security. I think you would agree with that.
HOWEVER
Please give me the proof that p*ssing on and desecrating the bodies of enemy fighters somehow makes us safer, or brings us closer to victory.
And before you talk about ‘cowing our enemy’ or whatever like some historically illiterate people on these comments have in the past, please remember what reaction the incidents of brutality toward OUR side generated in the public (burnt contractors hanging from a bridge, snipers bodies’ drug naked through the streets). Did they ‘cow’ us? Or did it spur us to fight harder?
“Again, they deserve to die. Why get bent out of shape over a much smaller thing? It’s not hypocrisy- when THEY do it to US they are doing it to people who DID NOT DESERVE IT.”
- Your moral worldview is very skewed. Desecration of the dead is immoral and barbaric NO MATTER WHO DOES IT. We as a people used to understand that. And yes, saying that something that is objectively evil, desecration of the dead, and saying that it’s ok as long as CERTAIN people do it but not others IS hypocrisy.
Please tell me, what other immoral acts that we traditionally associate with barbarism suddenly become neutral or virtuous just so long as we AMERICANS are doing it?
“All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts. A British Tory will defend self-determination in Europe and oppose it in India with no feeling of inconsistency. Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits, but according to who does them, and there is almost no kind of outrage — torture, the use of hostages, forced labour, mass deportations, imprisonment without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians — which does not change its moral colour when it is committed by ‘our’ side.”
- George Orwell, “Notes on Nationalism”
So you believe that desecrating a body is worse than killing the person in the first place?
Weird. I never was much for religion or superstition. Please don’t push them on me. A corpse is not a person. It does not have rights.
As to what benefit: It raised morale.
And as to:
“Please tell me, what other immoral acts that we traditionally associate with barbarism suddenly become neutral or virtuous just so long as we AMERICANS are doing it?”
Bombing buildings, shooting people, holding people against their will, burning people alive, etc, etc etc.
The real issue is: Does the enemy deserve it? Yes, yes he does.
Your basis for morality is “If we did it, then it’s right.”
We have nothing to discuss. I have no objective ground on which to discuss things with a moral relativist.
No, the issue is not since we do it it must be right. The issue is whether, by sending young men into war, should we expect to see occasional instances of poor judgment from them? I say, if they are fighting to protect my lousy butt, I don’t care if sometimes they act like people who don’t have a fully developed frontal lobe, because all of them are living with fear so that I don’t have to.
Mike, youre not connecting the dots….
Its not the same thing when “we” to do it to them…
Especially when what “we” do is so miniscule and tame compared to them.
Its not the same. Just like putting a criminal in a cell, and holding them “against their will” is NOT THE SAME THING as kidnapping someone, and holding THEM in a cage against their will.
Both involve the same thing…
Threat, Force, and Restraint, against the desire to walk away free.
One is a Criminal act, the other is a Just Punishment.
Its a real shame you cant see which is which.
“Especially when what “we” do is so miniscule and tame compared to them…”
- So it’s a question of volume? Is there a unit of measure for this?
“Its not the same. Just like putting a criminal in a cell, and holding them “against their will” is NOT THE SAME THING as kidnapping someone, and holding THEM in a cage against their will.”
- i think it’s you that doesn’t understand the difference. In the case of locking up a criminal, the one locking him up is presumed to have the just authority to do so. THAT is what separates kidnapping from just imprisonment.
What you are trying to say is that WE are JUSTIFIED in doing what we do and the enemy is not. But, WHAT are we justified in doing? Is EVERYTHING we do, regardless of what it is, justified? Why?
Because the jailer is justified in locking up the criminal to complete his sentence, is he, for example, justified to torture him on a whim?
The US Code of Military Justice tells us what we can do with POWs and the dead we come across on the field.
Yeah Mike,
The UCMJ
And great huge chunks of that garrison duty UCMJ goes out the window when blood is on the ground…Disrespect to an officer when he’s a complete pussy under fire, assault on an NCO when he’s about to get his people killed…A slap, and an “S.T.F.U. sir” attitude adjustment are MINOR events that do not go to SRB’s. Fragging? No, of course not.
Pissing on a dead enemy terrorist is a trivial event, just slightly less rude than farting without saying “excuse me”. Only a sissy who’s never heard someone burp out loud, or some disingenuous media whore, or lefty office seeker would think differently. Its THAT insignificant.
You see, Mike, it IS by a matter of degrees that we judge things. Child Molesters get fucked up in prison because of the vile nature of what they did, and the guards turn a blind eye. A car thief, or “personal use” guy doing a little county time, not so much.
And do you know WHY? And a little “illegal” personal habit that hurts no one but yourself DOESNT rate a bloody gang rape…raping and killing some poor innocent kid DOES, got that?
Its called fairness. Its called justice. Its called getting what the fuck you deserve, because of the evil things you’ve done.
Here’s a real world test for you:
Go arrest a 240 pound “big buck” of a muscular thug, who raped and beat nearly to death an 87 year old woman who GAVE him her purse without a struggle. Tell me how perfectly “genteel” and purely “honorable” you treat him when he resists, and spits in your face.
Then go arrest another guy, whos only crime is that he fell behind in his child support after he lost his job, and he apologizes profusely through tears of genuine shame while asks you to kill him because hes so embarrassed being unable to support his kid.
THAT guy gets treated differently, and do you know why, Mike?
Because he DESERVES TO BE.
Just like that thug got the “less than gentle” handling HE deserved.
Nothing “outrageous” about it, unless you’re a Useless Pussy
Your naval gazing, theoretical, author quoting, high-school debate team hypotheses on the Expectations Of Perfect Man, vs the REAL WORLD.
You. Lose.
Every time.
You are the relativist…
Peeing on their dead makes us “the same” as them?
Where are the tortured children?
The mutilated women?
The bombs strapped to the mentally ill?
The hostages, beheaded live on camera?
Oh, THATS right…our lack of ABSOLUTE PERFECTION in every endeavor is “the same”
as their limitless torture and murder of innocent non-combatents.
Gosh, how did I miss that?
Gee, your SO helpful in your ability to distinguish reality.
I would CERTAINLY trust the lives of MY children to your judgement, Mike.
Why dont you run for office on that platform?
The Media would LOVE you!
Pissing on someone is a college stunt, usually accompanied by alcohol. Not exactly a Mensa Candidate activity, granted, but you see videos of college students doing things like that to drunks on Tru-TV, WORLD’S DUMBEST…SHOW all the time. These guys were college age people, possibly reserves jerked out of college classes for a tour of active duty. The stupidest thing was allowing the pictures to be taken.
Why do we act under constraints that the other guy doesn’t? A great political philosopher gave the answer in an article about Herman Cain -
“The reason is: we’re the good guys. We have to do what’s right. The left doesn’t. Sorry, but that’s the way it works. It’s the price you pay for defending what’s true and good, the price of holding yourself to a high moral standard. Our politicians have to be better than their politicians. Our journalists have to be more honest. Even our protesters have to behave with decorum and decency—and still suffer being slandered—while theirs can act like animals and commit acts of violence and lawlessness and spew anti-semitic filth and still find themselves excused and glorified.”
That’s why our soldiers have to be better than their soldiers.
Our soldiers ARE better than theirs..EVEN WHEN WE PISS ON THEIR DEAD.
We havent beheaded any prisoners on camera, were better than them.
We dont stone women to death, we’re better than them.
We dont strap bombs to children and the mentally impaired, we’re better than them.
Even when we piss on them, were still better than them, because pissing on a dead body is SO MUCH LESS EVIL THAN WHAT THEY DO ITS NOT WORTH DISCUSSING.
Absolute Soldierly Perfection is an impossible, Alinski inspired media driven trick to aid the enemy, stop falling for it, and call it what it is.
A NON INCIDENT artificially inflated by our enemies in the MSM to curry favor with Lefist/Commie anti-american traitors world wide.
“And great huge chunks of that garrison duty UCMJ goes out the window when blood is on the ground”
- That such things DO happen, I will not deny. Where you and I differ is that I do not see such things are to be celebrated, encouraged or excused in the end.
“Pissing on a dead enemy terrorist is a trivial event, just slightly less rude than farting without saying “excuse me”. Only a sissy who’s never heard someone burp out loud, or some disingenuous media whore, or lefty office seeker would think differently. Its THAT insignificant.”
- It is a bit more serious than that. However, as I have pointed out again and again (and all of you continue to fail to see and understand) is that the act itself, while morally wrong, was not what drew my ire initially: it was that cheers of approval and eagerly shared ghoulish suggestions for further desecration by the peanut gallery around here that I found more sickening.
“Child Molesters get fucked up in prison because of the vile nature of what they did, and the guards turn a blind eye.”
- How is this just? It simply isn’t. It’s pure hatred. I believe there are criminals bad enough that they should NEVER walk free ever again (child molesters at the top, as you simply can’t “fix them”). There is a reason our sentences don’t include things like “sentenced to be raped daily for 14 years.” Our constitution forbids such savagery.
“DOESNT rate a bloody gang rape…raping and killing some poor innocent kid DOES, got that?”
- By whose standard? Yours? Yours in nothing but barbarism and hatred. It is not justice by any stretch. If you want to fantasize about sexually violating certain types of criminals, do it on your own time and don’t pretend to call it justice.
“Its called getting what the fuck you reserve, because of the evil things you’ve done.”
- No, what you are panting about is not ‘getting what you deserve’, it’s you engaging in revenge fantasy.
“Go arrest a 240 pound “big buck” of a muscular thug, who raped and beat nearly to death an 87 year old woman who GAVE him her purse without a struggle. Tell me how perfectly “genteel” and purely “honorable” you treat him when he resists, and spits in your face.”
- The answer is that I MUST use only what force is necessary as an officer of the law.
HOWEVER
I am also a fallen, weak man. In such circumstances I don’t know (I HOPE, but I don’t know for certain) if I could restrain myself to only what is just in this case. I am not a robot. If raised to extreme wrath, I might very well do something terrible, though I pray I would have the strength to NOT engage in such depravity.
But here’s the thing: Even if I did ‘lose it’ in such a situation, while my culpability would be somewhat lessened (as civil law most of the time takes into account) WHAT I DID WAS STILL MORALLY WRONG. Just because I lost control doesn’t mean the act miraculously becomes morally neutral or virtuous.
“THAT guy gets treated differently, and do you know why, Mike? Because he DESERVES TO BE.”
- Actually, not to point out the obvious, but in your second example he will obviously be treated differently because HE’S NOT RESISTING ARREST. Although your ‘rape revenge fantasy’ you love to dally in will be a a reality more for him than the rapist listed above once the law has him, at least financially and emotionally.
I also think that the quality of a man’s reasoning later in an argument can usually be determined very quickly at the onset by how often he resorts to using obscenities. Your ‘reasoning’ here is nothing more than baseless assertions blended with a healthy scoop of moral relativism and juvenile rape fantasies, then garnished liberally with sprinkles of ‘f*ck’. And you expect me to take you seriously…
“Your naval gazing, theoretical, author quoting, high-school debate team hypotheses on the”
- I would rephrase it as simply me restating what is morally right in this case as opposed to day dreaming about gang raping people in prison like you do.
“Expectations Of Perfect Man, vs the REAL WORLD.”
- ‘Be you therefore perfect, even as your Father who is in heaven is perfect.’ Realistic goal? Not in this life, but we are required to try.
Oops, clicked wrong link. This response is obviously intended for Root ’83s post further up.
The problem here is the internet, and the ubiquity of cellphone cameras, and the current generation of young people who use one to communicate what they recorded on the other, with no sense that anyone other than close friends will see it. Probably, similar incidents have occurred in other wars. People here have cited George Patton taking a leak in the Rhine River in 1945 as an example; to my mind a better example of Patton doing this would be when he pissed in Terry Allen’s slit trench in Tunisia, humiliating a Major General and division commander in front of his staff and some soldiers. Even there, though, he had a purpose: he didn’t think Allen should be taking so much time making sure he was safe, instead believing he should be out leading his troops in combat. This current video appears to have been just boys-will-be-boys hijinks, with no discernable positive result, and an obvious negative one.
Pinky got it right, quoting (I think) Mr. Klavan a few months ago during the Herman Cain thing (still not sure he isn’t completely innocent). Our soldiers have to be better than theirs. Period.
The Taliban were still angry at Buddhists from 1,500 years ago and so attacked the only trace left, giant statues.
I imagine the Taliban gnashing their teeth when a cloud passes over the sun because they can’t saw the head off a cloud. If they had an air force they might machine gun clouds. I understand the gov’t response cuz even if they’re secretly pleased they can’t go around acting like “bring it on.” Still, I bet many are secretly pleased.
This is one of those where you chastise the boys in public and then say “Well done but don’t tape it.”
Mike in KC, I believe you’re using straw-men arguments.
The 4 Marines in question, you’re ONLY going back to the RECENT incident prior to their ridiculous act.
It’s a shame, though I understand why you hadn’t, discussed the very real possibility(its) of seeing or hearing of their fellow soldiers, friends being injured or killed in other firefights weeks, months prior.
Soldiers wives, girlfriends back in the West leaving, cheating or ignoring their partner in the M E altogether.
Perhaps emails/Facebook entries are fewer and fewer. Their ‘status’ changing.
Or the soldier seeing/hearing on Armed Network TV (AFRTS when I was in) of another Muslim woman getting acid thrown in her face, an execution due to witchcraft, a school bus of children getting ambushed, suicide bomber hitting a hospital or another Western Embassy being evacuated again due to.. take your pick.
Their eating the same tasteless shawarma for the umpteenth time and other bland food served up by TCN’s or other untrained cooks.
On the same patrol a soldier may get a thumbs up from local citizenry and a split second later get shot at by those same individuals. Ad infinitum.
Mike, dependent upon their location in-country, downtime may be moot or downright primitive.
Bikram Yoga, meditation tents are MIA while there. Going to a pub to relieve sexual tension is nonexistent (though the occasional hookup does occur with the few female soldiers in-country). Some being there for their 2nd, 3rd and even 4th rodeo.
Some units enjoy light-nonexistent patrols, worry-free checkpoints. Maybe enjoying a softball league or near-beer, ping-pong and projector screen movies at an enlisted tent/hooch etc., Accompanied with a top-of-the-line gym, barbershop..
Whereas other units may as well be on the moon, have NO amenities whatsoever and be on constant alert.
Yes we do have a volunteer military and they indeed have control of their actions and in most instances the career field they’re presently in. But you’re writing-off or armchair QB their action with NO background whatsoever.. I’d stop with the nonsensical sanctimony.
What you FAIL to realize is the enemy doesn’t recognize the Geneva Convention, defeat or their severe losses to rationally come to an accord for starters.
Do I think the remaining active duty Marines involved in this get due punishment? Sure. As per their superior. And NOT because some military service evading a sshats in D.C. wish it so.
Videotaping the incident was stupid and totally uncalled for. Though the reason(s) if there’s such a thing for their action can be juvenile or something else altogether.. in their rationale.
Though I don’t write it off as ‘PTSD’ or other blanket diagnosis because our military psychological departments are truly top-notch.
The briefing to/ debriefing leaving the M E theater and closeness of the Corps is quite remarkable.
Paul,
No, I fully realize the tremendous stress that must be involved. I also know that stress of various levels can limit culpability in certain situations (our very civil code of law does this as well.)
Just because one is under stress, however, is not a reason to NOT condemn an action, no more than stress of unemployment and financial trouble is an excuse for a man to beat his wife and children, nor is ‘having a really bad day’ be an excuse for a policeman to beat a traffic violator, for example.
In both situations, would stress contribute to the lowering of will power to resist doing such act? Of COURSE! However, in no case is it still excusable.
What I think you are trying to say is something along the lines of ‘they were under stress, so these things happen.’ That’s not in dispute. Stress or no, the behavior is not befitting someone who claims to be honorable.
An isolated incident (or at least apparently the only one recorded and stupidly posted where it can go viral) involving just four service members, with no background info on what happened before the incident and all of a sudden we have a “failed military” and “breakdown in control” – as others have posted on this site – with verbal hand wringing by senior govenment officials.
And now we have yourself, Mike, and others who endlessly expound the fact that it isn’t honorable and is reprehensible. You’ve made your point that in your opinion it’s a bad thing (although your post at 12:20 pm on 1/23 seems to be making the point that recording the act was the bad thing; now that’s curious). Others have disageed with you. Their points are valid also.
In the end it was stupid to record and post the incident. For their act – it is not desecration by definition – they should be punished at the unit level (kind of hard since at least one is of the guys is apparently out of the military now) for their lapse of self control. That should be the end of the story.
You, however, want them punished in a public manner because their recording went public. So, Mike, what do you really want? It sure looks like you want them punished and humilitated in public for posting it rather than for the act itself. Very strange and, in my opinion, points to the fact that you have little or no military combat experience. That’s not meant as a personal attack on you – there are countless others in the same situation – just an observation and worth considering when weighing your comments.
You misunderstand.
The act itself is what was wrong.
The fact that they published it in a VERY public manner is what made it a LOT worse.
Good job men! Now, get whacking more of those tallyban!
This incident strikes me as an indication of the frustration the troops in the field are experiencing, many having made numerous deployments. They are asked to fight a war with no clear definition of victory, fighting a shadowy enemy which their commander in chief has for all intents and purposes forbidden them to clearly define. No references to Islam or Muslims allowed unless it pertains to how they are to subordinate themselves to Muslim sensitivities. For one ironic example, the troops have been issued cultural guidance materiel which among other things advises them not to urinate while facing in the direction of Mecca. The troops are immersed in a hostile society where they can trust nobody, and being infidels they can never expect any gratitude for their efforts and sacrifices. They never know if a bullet will be coming from a uniformed member of the Afghan military or from the Taliban.
Entering into the second decade of this pointless war the American public and the media have pretty much lost all interest in it. The presidential candidates have debated every inane subject immaginable but hardly mentioned Afghanistan. We as a society are figuratively urinating on our own troops by not demanding an immediate end to this madness and by not recognizing the futility of putting an infidel army on the ground in a Muslim country.
From his comments, Mikey in KC is a moralistic little troll with zero experience of killing, or even standing up to, bad guys.
Mikey, shut up.
Yes, instead of debating questions on the moral rightness or wrongness of a particular act like a grownup, we should just call the person a ‘troll’ and tell him to go away.
No thinking for yourself allowed in the echo chamber!
I see you have learned your political arguing from ACORN and the ‘Occupy’ movement well.
I don’t see why trying to avoid immoral acts is equal to ‘not standing up to bad guys’. Are you stating that the only way to stand up for yourself is to be immoral? What an odd worldview you have.
Mike, I have read all of your comments and I draw two conclusions. First, you have never been to war so you can’t understand that civil behavior is pretty much gone by the time a war starts. Second, I think you are working for the Obama campaign and this is your attempt to engage conservative people on his behalf. We were all here for the internet slaughtering of John McCain and the subsequent election of a communist to our White House and we all know it will be tried again this year. So I say, just buzz off.
“First, you have never been to war ”
- YOu are correct.
“so you can’t understand that civil behavior is pretty much gone by the time a war starts.”
- That terrible and immoral things are done, I understand. I don’t understand why that means we must embrace and celebrate them like so many here seem to advocate.
“Second, I think you are working for the Obama campaign”
- CURSES! You’ve found me out! Yes, I am an Obama plant. I spend my time here on a backwater mainly neocon blog trying to tempt away people who wouldn’t dream of questioning their political assumptions if their lives depended on it. What shall I do now? I’ve been found out!
Funny, I used to try to debate people over on the democraticunderground as well. I got called a neocon and was banned. I guess I just don’t belong anywhre.
Most of us haven’t seen combat – you’re welcome to your opinion about it.
Your original point, that urinating on the Taliban dead was not praiseworthy, was valid. I agree, and most people here seem to agree as well. (The Secretaries of Defense and State should resign immediately.)
Of course you framed the original point poorly, talking about a picture of a WWII soldier giving a drink to a wounded German. Are you suggesting that the soldiers of yesteryear are better than our men today? Seems silly.
But the reason you’re suspected of Obama-voting is that your arguments are so obnoxiously ad hominem: “I am obviously not a manly-man like you”, “I see you’re from the Bill Clinton school of grammer (sic)”, “If you want to use your personal hatred…”, “Did reading comprehension just get thrown out of schools once I left?” All this in the service of the pedestrian point that urinating on a corpse isn’t praiseworthy.
If you seek to persuade, knock off the insults. If you just want verbal knife-play, bring something bigger than that Cub Scout jack-knife next time.
“Are you suggesting that the soldiers of yesteryear are better than our men today? Seems silly.”
- No, again, it appears that people really don’t read the comments here. My entire point was to simply compare in a memory what the reaction of the ‘rah! rah! p*ss on them!’ crowd would be to seeing something like that. I thought that was fairly obvious.
“I am obviously not a manly-man like you”
- This is merely noticing a pattern in most of the commentators’ attacks on me. If you had actually read any of the responses, you’d notice that the general reaction to my statement that the act of corpse desecration was wrong was that I must be either a pacifist, a coward or in league with the enemy, or all three. Hence I was simply restating the others’ perception.
“I see you’re from the Bill Clinton school of grammer (sic)”
- When someone tries to avoid calling a moral evil a moral evil by trying to tweek the definition of ‘evil’, what else can one say? It is what Clinton did.
“If you want to use your personal hatred…”
- Because people fantasizing in explicit and psychotic detail all the violations they would love to inflict upon the corpse of an enemy, such a dark desire can only come from hatred.
“Did reading comprehension just get thrown out of schools once I left?”
- Because he quite obviously failed to understand a very… simple… chain of though. I’m writing Shakespeare here. I’m not playing word games. Yet I am at a loss to understand how people miss the point constantly.
“All this in the service of the pedestrian point that urinating on a corpse isn’t praiseworthy.”
- Skipping brushing your teeth in the morning ‘isn’t praiseworthy’. Defiling the dead is a moral evil. There is a difference.
“If you seek to persuade, knock off the insults.”
- There isn’t a single one of you that can be persuaded into anything that doesn’t match exactly with your existing outlook. And I’m not trying to insult anyone. I simply say “If the boot fits…”
“If you just want verbal knife-play, bring something bigger than that Cub Scout jack-knife next time.”
- Awwww… If you think argument and debate is ‘won’ by simply calling the other party a tool of the enemy because he doesn’t buy into the cheerleading for whatever the debauchery du jour is, well, keep dreaming.
Obama’s an opponent, not an enemy. If you like him, fine. The only commenters that tick me off are the ones who pretend to be GOP to mess with our primary field.
I didn’t accuse you of being an Obama supporter, either. I just pointed out that people sense you’re an opponent because you’re so free with insults.
If people didn’t comprehend your point the first time, try it again in different language – don’t imply that they were poorly schooled. And why would it be impossible to persuade people here that urinating on the Taliban dead was not praiseworthy? If you were more polite and respectful, you might have changed minds.
A “moral evil”? C’mon. Save that for kiddie porn, human bondage, and murder. These guys did something stupid. I’ve done stupid things in my time, and since they’re putting their lives on the line for their country on the battlefield, I’m inclined to cut them slack.
“Cmon” doesn’t qualify as an argument for anything.
You are again attempting to ‘do the Clinton’: What I did isn’t THAT bad! Hey I didn’t kick a baby, or something, which totally means that any act I did that is not quite as evil as that automatically becomes either neutral or virtuous!
I shouldn’t do this, but I can’t help myself. There’s something twisted, but still incredibly funny about…
I look at it like this. I don’t walk in a soldier’s shoes, and the least I can do is give my undivided support to our military that fights for the safety and freedom of me and my family. I am forever grateful to the men and women of the U.S. military.
I’m not sitting there getting shot at, having my friends killed, viewing thugs sawing heads off. While it tacky and stupid to film, frankly I don’t give one tinkers damn about what our brave soldiers do to these inhuman savages. I hope they burn these SOBs alive. But don’t film it boys.
Obama is pi$$ing away the war on terror – not the four marines. He is purposely tying the hands of the combatants. I firmly he is putting them in harms way to kill them off. I feel he is such a traitor that his intention is to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. I personally hate this man (obama) so much for what he is doing to our country and our troops that I finally understand that bds the progs had over Bush – who I also detested.
Remember the slap on the hand those soldiers and the commanding officer got for killing almost 200 villagers in Me Lai?
Those soldiers were jsut exercising their right of expression the same way as the author of the “Jesus in the Piss” was.
It’s “Piss Christ”.
But “Piss Christ/Piss Allah; Cum si cum sa.
I’ve read several accounts of the Vietnam War in which the North Vietnamese or Viet Cong lopped off dead American’s genitals and sewed them into the American’s mouth. As I understand it, that was their way of disrespecting American dead and trying to scare the living into not messing with them.
I’m not saying that either practice – the Vietnamese mutilation of dead Americans or the American urination on Taliban – are acceptable, just that there is precedent for the mutilation of dead soldiers. It is certainly not just Americans that have committed such acts.
“He then facilitated overthrows in Egypt and Libya, leaving those countries to almost certain domination by the jihad-loving Muslim Brotherhood.”
Funny how you don’t hear much in the mainstream media these days about Egypt, let alone Libya. You remember Libya, that war that was fought just on the president’s say so, with absolutely no vote or approval from Congress? Yes, that little skirmish where we had absolutely no right being in yet we did jump in on the side of the “rebels” who wanted to overthrow Gaddafi. Pity that we didn’t do any homework and find out who these “rebels” really were. Then we found out that not only were a lot of them al Qaeda or al Qaeda sympathizers, but a lot of them even fought AGAINST American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. There’s “smart power” for you. Maybe Ron Paul is right. Maybe we should just stay home and not have anything to do with the outside world. Because, if this is the best we can come up with these days, people like Obama and Clinton totally destroying what’s left of our foreign policy, it may just be time to stay home. At least we can’t get into anymore trouble that way.
The act of pissing on dead Taliban was wrong, making the video was stupid and releasing of the video on the web idiotic. That said, the most disgusting aspect of the incident are the statements of Hillary, Panetta and other so-called leaders. They’ve managed to take relatively minor event and blow it out of all proportion to its true significance. Calls for public execution of the perpetrators is rich considering we live in an era of presidents having oral sex with an intern in the Oval Office, insider trading by elected representatives, and “pissing” away billions on the likes of Solynda.
Let’s separate Obama and his administration from America the people. Obama is a clueless moron whereas the American people are a people who’s spirit and resilience are legendary. Screw the Taliban and the PC generals … screw Obama and the PC crap that he’s espousing …. … Staying home is NOT the answer.
There is one place on this entire planet where people understand freedom and that is the U.S.A. WE give more in aid than the rest of the world combined; we give more in military support than the rest of the world combined; we volunteer for humane causes more than the rest of the world combined … and that’s just the beginning!!!!
Islam is our enemy and we cannot let them set the narrative … F?!K THEM §§§§.
Klavan!!! You’re talking out of fear because you don’t know what the future entails!!! Stop it!!!! The future of America is secure … in spite of Obama; the rest of the world is being prepared to receive everything America has to offer, because the rest of the world is crying out for freedom. Too bad that renovation often entails the destruction of something before it can be rebuilt … so take heart and concentrate on the what matters – not Obama and his dopey administration because they are being replaced in spite of the best efforts of the media and the establishment of DC. The blood of every one of our men and women that has been spilled on battlefields abroad will speak from the earth and
and will bring forth GOOD.
RANT OVER !!! Phew!!!!
The marines in question accepted the uniform and the code that went with it. They have to be held up to the standard.
With that said police, fire, rescue personnel and soldiers often protect civilians who are not worth someone else putting their lives on the line for them.
How many of those people worried about the urinating marines were put off by a Palestinian showing blood on his hands to the mob outside, were shocked by the beheadings done by Al Qaeda in Iraq or care about Copts in Egypt, etc. etc…..remember a lot of these people are not anti-war they are on the other side.
In the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx proudly asserts that the communists do not hide their goals.
And wait for tonight’s great class war declaration…
dear Mr Klaven if the war was really over then why are Our troops still there fighting and dieing in that hell hole? killing it one thing; disgracing your self and an enemy is another especially when there whole country can see you doing that as well and all your bosses here and our friends around the world. all they get is good job solder wake up and smell the coffee
Don’t worry folks. A picture of some Marines taking a wiss on the enemy is the least of your worries. The enemy has come here to us, and is growing thanks to the CFR agenda of getting as many moon god worshipers into the country.
The enemy are Americans on paper only. Having their own Holidays, and sticking their noses up at the infidels. Add illegal aliens from turd world countries on the sugar tit to the culture problem.
Keep your go bags, your weapon, ammo, and H-harness ready. Your BDU’s should be hanging up in the mud room for putting on quickly. If the moon god worshipers do not attack near you, just wait for 400 tonados within 72hrs, or an earthquake.
Proper planning prevents piss poor performance, or don’t wait for your Mommie to do it for you!
Moon worshippers?
Let me guess, you probably think Catholics are sun worshipers too. Makes about as much sense as what your peddling.
“The enemy are Americans on paper only. Having their own Holidays”
*GASP!* Just like those Catholics, amiright? Don’t they know that good Americans don’t celebrate things like the Feast of the Assumption or Corpus Christi?
Get it right puke face. Moon god worshipers, just as history proves. Not moon worshipers. Plus, if you were not a voice for the enemy, you would have already been shocked at the Muslim for Americas terrorist videos inside America.
There you can watch the videos, and hear the Imam declare America is the root of the enemy, and they are here to strike at said enemy.
Allah Akbar. The god is greatest. Greater than what said the infidel? Allah is greater than all the other 359 gods at the kabba. Where the black rock will take away your sins.
Now, get on your face towards Mecca, and pray to your false moon god, and follow Muhammad by support, or activly being part of a terrorist group.
I’ve schooled you before in this. Islam is much closer to a heresy of Christianity than another actual religion. It is no more ‘moon god worship’ than Arianism was.
Muhammad raped, and murdered using a false religion to futher his gains. History proves me correct. Muhammad’s father was named after the moon god.
There, you have been schooled. Now, get that moon off your Mosque.
“Muhammad raped, and murdered using a false religion to futher his gains. ”
- True, but this does not prove that Islam is just some kind of paganism. There is no cause/effect here.
“Muhammad’s father was named after the moon god.”
- His father did not found Islam.
You’re embarrassing yourself, please stop.
Dumb, to film it…..
that’s all.
my feelings, what taliban ” troops” and it is a loose term, have done to america’s captured, and to there own people, to women and girls, even to men, rape, over and over again. sure it was wrong, but come on, we forget folks this is a war. Our president, bowing to forighn kings, being all upset if we do not treat the taliban with dignety, he has not got a clue what war is. Mr Obama, Grow Up !
If it’s against the rules, we need to change the rules.
In addition, the rules should require wrapping the enemy dead in pigskins or smearing them with bacon grease.
So, if we change the rules, that means it would then be totally fine for them to desecrate our dead too in some way, right? They wouldn’t wrap us in pig skins, of course… perhaps they’d tie our dead to trucks and drag them around the terrain for a while.
I mean, as long as we’ve decided that it’s totally cool to violate the dead, we shouldn’t deny our enemies the fun, right? I know all our staunch, manly-men neo cons here don’t want to be total hypocrites. Goose, gander, sauce, you know…
I recommend you see a professional for some help.
As I stated in reply to Comment #2, a policy of desecrating the corpses of suicide bomber with pork oil could save lives by discouraging suicide bombing. The Russians do it, and so should we.
American soldiers and marines tend not to leave our fallen behind. When we do, they seem to get desecrated by Islamists, provocation or no.
“I know all our staunch, manly-men neo cons here don’t want to be total hypocrites.” WTF? Do you mean Jews when you say neo-con? If not, how is it an insult?
“I recommend you see a professional for some help.” Are you in junior high?
would that “desecrating our dead” is the only thing our enemies would do! generally our enemies are the ones who are making our people dead in the first place, by beheading them on camera and other wonderful things like that, which don’t get half the attention from this administration that these poor Marines did.
if you truly think that “if we have a culture worth emulating, other countries” will suddenly like us, you’re dangerously naive. let’s hope our next president doesn’t share your innocence and ignorance of the big bad world.
I notice neither of you actually raised an objection to the hypothetical scenario I raised.
I pointed out that your scenario was flawed: the Islamist enemy already desecrates every American corpse that comes their way, so a policy of bacon grease on Islamist corpses cannot affect their treatment of our dead.
No, my point (rather obvious I thought, again) was that if we embrace desecration of the enemy, we have no right to raise objections when they do it to us.
Were the Marines wrong? Yes. Were they totally stupid for filming and posting the video? Yes. Is it over reacting to want them publicly punished for what they did? Not really. Had they not recorded it or if they had not posted it to YouTube they would probably gotten away with just non judicial punishment. ( Read Office Hours or at most a courts Martial.) By posting the video where it had every expectation of being seen by many people the Marines brought it on themselves. They called attention to themselves. They were knowingly disobeying the Code of Conduct and they deserve what they get. Terminal Stupidity is no excuse.
That being said, before someone accuses me of being a peacenik, I spent ten years in the Marine Corps, one of which was in Vietnam. All wars have their atrocities. The most well known from my war was Lt. Calley and Me Lai. What is not mentioned often is the taking of ears or fingers by our soldiers as trophies. It happened, it was against the Code of Conduct, it was punished if they were caught. The punishment was handled in house. Usually a bust in rank and a fine. Those taking the trophies were usually front line troops that had seen their own people disemboweled and hung from a tree. That or seen their comrades taken out of action by stepping on a punji stake coated in human excrement or by being blown apart by a booby trap.
Those Marines were wrong to urinate on the enemy dead and should take their punishment. What I would like to know is how long after the battle did this occur? It couldn’t have been more than a couple of hours since we don’t just leave corpses laying around. Were these Marines involved in the battle that killed those enemy? What were those enemy doing when they got killed? Could the have been planting a mine that could have killed dozens of our guys? It was still wrong no matter but it could have been a mitigating factor had they not posted the video. Had those Taliban been shooting at me just a short time before I might have joined in with the pissing match.
Very well put.
The problem is that this country does not like long wars. Even in WW2, people were sick of it by late ’44. And this has gone for a decade.
Afghanistan is not a winnable conflict unless we take it to Pakistan as well. You can’t win a guerilla war unless you isolate your enemy from getting new supplies and troops from outside the border.
And we’re simply not willing to do that. As a result, we’ve become bogged down and we’ve lost a lot of face in the world, being beaten by goatherders.
But on the flip side, the tide in the Muslim world to embrace Islamism already existed. Look at Turkey – before this whole mess started, they had turned from a Western leaning moderate country to one that was basically Islamist like the muslim brotherhood.
There’s nothing we could have done to stop this. Propping up moderate dictators was not working – it only built more anger towards us. But even if Egypt had mostly been a democracy like Turkey, it was inevitable.
So what’s the solution? There isn’t a military one – we need to learn to start minding our own business, quit telling people what to do, and put our own country in order. Make it the free country that we like to brag about, not the one that has more people in jail than any other in the world, the one where regulations and red tape are everywhere.
If we have a culture that really is worth emulating, other countries will adopt, rather than deride us as being phonies.
You gotta love guys who go nuts ’cause some Marines took a leak on some Talibannies…after thousands of Americans have been killed in terror attack after terror attack, spanning decades.
Get some perspective, dude.
would things be different if the marines had peed on live taliban?
So now that we are pulling troops out of the Middle East we can see the net result of the “war on terror”. We sent l50,000 troops along with a couple of trillion dollars; we lost thousands of soldiers with thousands more disabled or paralyzed. But we were successful: we got bin Laden.
Once was a time when a man pissed to make a point…Patton had it preserved for posterity! http://definingthenarrative.com/2012/01/20/to-pee-or-not-to-pee-men-and-war/