PDA

View Full Version : I support the peeing Marines



DrT
01-12-2012, 11:59 PM
I love all the Monday-morning QB'ing going on at the Pentagon and State Dept (why is Sec Clinton commenting?) over the peeing Marines.

How can we expect these killers to behave normally when they are surrounded by insanity? Structure drives behavior, when a human is put into a chaotic structure, we should expect them to act differently. Zimbardo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment)knew this and so did Dr. Livingstone (http://www.bbk.ac.uk/news/dr.-livingstones-lost-1871-massacre-diary-recovered). Why does this surprise us? We should expect it and do our best to correct it, but not crucify.

We as a nation threw young troops under the bus with Abu Gharib (http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2008/02/ted_zimbardo?currentPage=all) and now we're doing it again.

All of D.C. is in line, pounding their chests, looking for a Marine to fry. How about somebody supporting them? How about a General stand up and explain what adrenaline does to one's decision making process?

Read Charlie Wilson's War and learn what the Taliban did to their male Russian captives--this gives some context and perhaps explains why the Taliban aren't too troubled by this story.

Hindsight is 20-20, but I'll pass no judgement on how someone behaves in a combat zone, especially after experiencing combat. Only in Hollywood can someone participate in a firefight and then go run a Boy Scout meeting. Only in Hollywood and D.C. ...

Banned
01-13-2012, 01:08 AM
It's a shitty situation.

1) This is a cross-cultural conflict, which means both sides are operating under a different set of rules and values, so there's no camaraderie or respect for the opponent. The warm fuzzy stuff that we've seen in certain other wars (Like cease-fires for Christmas, or enemy medics working side by side), just doesn't happen. Because we see them not as fellow humans, but as agents of Satan, and vica versa.

2) The infamous ROE's are necessary - we can't afford to be pissing everyone off with indiscriminate killing, both on the local level (every American atrocity is a recruiting tool for the insurgents), and on the international level (again, every atrocity that hits the air waves will attract new recruits, weapons, money, and general public support for the insurgents) - but the ROE, however imortant strategically, does get people killed, so aren't exactly popular.

So you got the Idaho farm boys in a strange land with a foreign language filled with people who hate them, and the ROE keeps them from killing everything in sight... that's going to lead to a lot of stress and bad feelings, which leads to incidents like this. Its a nasty dilemna.

The only way to prevent things like this is to not fight the war in the first place.

zachjonesishome
01-13-2012, 02:31 PM
Seems the American public is not so upset about it. It's a war and things happen in war.


http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/01/americans_dont_share_liberal_outrage_over_urinateg ate.html

VCO
01-13-2012, 05:13 PM
I think it was dumb to put it on the internet. Other than that, I have No issue with it. They have done far worse to us and are trying like crazy to kill us daily. They won't face us. Instead they hide and plant bombs/shoot rockets. Fuck them. I've seen the young kids leaving here missing limbs and severely wounded, or even worse in a box.

giggawatt
01-13-2012, 06:39 PM
I love how one news channel had Jessica Lynch on as a consultant in such matters!

Banned
01-13-2012, 07:00 PM
I love how one news channel had Jessica Lynch on as a consultant in such matters!

She kinda is an expert on such matters, from personal experience!

raider8169
01-13-2012, 07:05 PM
Do we have a rule against peeing on someone? What if the corpses were on fire and we had no other way to put it out?

Banned
01-13-2012, 07:21 PM
If your buddy becomes a heat casualty you're supposed to pee on him, as long as you say "No homo" first.

MACHINE666
01-13-2012, 09:44 PM
Hey, all the idiots and douchebags who have those 'I support the Troops' stickers on their over-priced and unnecessary SUVs and/or mini-vans can finally put their mouths where their money is and come stick up for these guys I say! To wear that little yellow ribbon on your car means to take the good with the bad, so make good on it already.

jaymarine1775
01-13-2012, 10:07 PM
"In war there is no moral high ground". - The dead body should be an example to others, psychology.
"In war honor is meeting your enemy in the arena". - Nation building doesn't defeat warriors, warriors defeat warriors.
"In war there is only one thing you need to know". - The quick walk out of the arena, the dead bleed on the sand.
"In war only the dead have seen the end of it". - Self Explanatory.
"In war violence is the answer". - The people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki agree with this, the people of Haditha agree with this.

You take humans and put them in a fight against people who will torture and behead you if they capture you. Who will drag your body through the street if you are dead. Who have killed your friends with IEDs and small arms.

These Marines did nothing wrong urinating on Taliban bodies, they could of defecated on them for all I care I would of looked the other way like the NCOs out there with them most likely did. However the tactical error was videotaping it, not because of it getting them in trouble. Because it gives the enemy something to use, propaganda.

All humans doing something as unnatural as killing have to deal with somehow. Not because anyone likes to fight or likes to kill, but it has be done. If you are someone who has to kill what the organization teaches you is limited what you go out and study on your own as a warrior, is what makes a more proficient killer. It is the difference between a warrior who can handle any situation and one who will die when they can't handle the situation, when they only study an MOS number.


Cry "Havoc," and let slip the dogs of war.

William Shakespeare, "Julius Caesar"

Banned
01-14-2012, 01:02 AM
"In war there is no moral high ground". - The dead body should be an example to others, psychology.

There is not only a moral high ground, it is arguably the #1 most important high ground to control. We have complete and total air superiority, overwhelming fire superiority, and in many cases superior numbers (The Marines in Marjah by far outnumber any local Taliban present) - but all that means dick if we play the role as the aggressive imperialists and unify everyone in the Middle East against us. If we do that, eventual defeat is inevitable, no matter how much military hardware we have.


"In war honor is meeting your enemy in the arena". - Nation building doesn't defeat warriors, warriors defeat warriors.

Superior logistics and economic policy will always win, no matter how great the warriors are. It doesn't matter how badass you are if you're outnumbered 20 to 1 and just ran out of ammo.


"In war there is only one thing you need to know". - The quick walk out of the arena, the dead bleed on the sand.
"In war only the dead have seen the end of it". - Self Explanatory.

Nice maxims, but not particularly relevant, or even useful.


"In war violence is the answer". - The people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki agree with this, the people of Haditha agree with this.

Sort of. What were the objectives of the nuclear strikes on Japan? There were two:

1) Defeat Japan. Irrelevant, Japan was already defeated, and running out of food, their surrender was inevitable with or without the nukes.

2) Show the USSR that America had a monopoly on nukes, and were willing to use them against civilians... a display of "shock and awe" so to speak. Didn't work. The Soviets laughed at us and got their own nuclear arsenal within a few years.


You take humans and put them in a fight against people who will torture and behead you if they capture you. Who will drag your body through the street if you are dead. Who have killed your friends with IEDs and small arms.

And vica versa. We'll kill or torture any Taliban we catch. It's THAT kind of war.


These Marines did nothing wrong urinating on Taliban bodies, they could of defecated on them for all I care I would of looked the other way like the NCOs out there with them most likely did. However the tactical error was videotaping it, not because of it getting them in trouble. Because it gives the enemy something to use, propaganda.

Even without videotaping it, the act was stupid. We may not give a shit about the Afghan people, but they are the most important factor in "winning" this war. If they see us desecrating the corpses of their neighbors and cousins, they will hate us for it.


All humans doing something as unnatural as killing have to deal with somehow. Not because anyone likes to fight or likes to kill, but it has be done. If you are someone who has to kill what the organization teaches you is limited what you go out and study on your own as a warrior, is what makes a more proficient killer. It is the difference between a warrior who can handle any situation and one who will die when they can't handle the situation, when they only study an MOS number.

All true. I agree absolutely. But if the politicians and the DoD choose to send people into that kind of situation... they had better have a damn good reason for it.

MitchellJD1969
01-14-2012, 06:16 AM
Do we have a rule against peeing on someone? What if the corpses were on fire and we had no other way to put it out?


That reminds me of a time at PTA on the Big Island and Marines having to put out some fires.

SENDBILLMONEY
01-14-2012, 04:16 PM
Why is Secretary Clinton commenting? Hmm, probably because the Marines' actions affect diplomatic interests. I'm sure more than a few people from State are working taskers generated solely because of this.

"How can we expect these killers to behave normally when they are surrounded by insanity?" Because they're not just hired guns, they're United States Marines. They're not supposed to be mere killers, but killers under discipline.

If the Marines' conduct were commonplace, it wouldn't be news. I haven't seen a bunch of combat vets jumping in to defend the right of U.S. personnel to piss on the enemy, and my retired REMF self sees no reason to defend it either.

giggawatt
01-14-2012, 04:49 PM
The dead know only one thing. It is better to be alive. Then they wouldn't get peed on!

MrMiracle
01-17-2012, 05:41 PM
We're dealing with an enemy that isn't concerned about losing their life. However, they are very deeply concerned about losing their afterlife. Maybe that's what needs to be taken away.

Ham implants.

JD2780
01-17-2012, 05:54 PM
That reminds me of a time at PTA on the Big Island and Marines having to put out some fires.


PTA was the shit. It was like being TDY with out the hassle of flying 5 1/2 hours.

USMC0369
01-17-2012, 05:57 PM
"In war there is no moral high ground". - The dead body should be an example to others, psychology.
"In war honor is meeting your enemy in the arena". - Nation building doesn't defeat warriors, warriors defeat warriors.
"In war there is only one thing you need to know". - The quick walk out of the arena, the dead bleed on the sand.
"In war only the dead have seen the end of it". - Self Explanatory.
"In war violence is the answer". - The people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki agree with this, the people of Haditha agree with this.

Cry "Havoc," and let slip the dogs of war.

William Shakespeare, "Julius Caesar"

Oh for the love of Christ...

AJBIGJ
01-18-2012, 04:01 PM
People are entitled to all sorts of opinions on the matter. Mine is I would be absolutely fine if they got the old dull blade responsible for the beheading videos all those years back and cut off the offending appendages of these four individuals, and broadcast that on YouTube. The stupidity of these four will undoubtedly contribute to the deaths of more than four thousand (American and Afghan) over the long term because like Joe said, this is a severe detriment to our entire ability to effectively work with the good ones (yes there are those also) in the future. Absent complete abandonment of the entire country tomorrow, these idiots are putting the lives of countless numbers of their own brothers and sisters in our military at risk by providing their Jihad propagandists with all of the fodder they need to continue this tripe facsimile of a war indefinitely.

It pains me to read the complaints fielded by the grand propagandist himself Osama Bin Laden and to find that in fact many of his allegations against us are somewhat justified when viewed from a "if it were to happen to us" perspective. The actions of these four added yet another "transgression" to the list, and a bleaker outlook for a future where we can move away from this self-destructive lifestyle of warfarism in our overseas foreign policy. I don't mind for a minute throwing these traitors under a bus, and I hope it's packed full of passengers for the fullest effect.

USMC0369
01-18-2012, 05:58 PM
People are entitled to all sorts of opinions on the matter. Mine is I would be absolutely fine if they got the old dull blade responsible for the beheading videos all those years back and cut off the offending appendages of these four individuals, and broadcast that on YouTube. The stupidity of these four will undoubtedly contribute to the deaths of more than four thousand (American and Afghan) over the long term because like Joe said, this is a severe detriment to our entire ability to effectively work with the good ones (yes there are those also) in the future. Absent complete abandonment of the entire country tomorrow, these idiots are putting the lives of countless numbers of their own brothers and sisters in our military at risk by providing their Jihad propagandists with all of the fodder they need to continue this tripe facsimile of a war indefinitely.

It pains me to read the complaints fielded by the grand propagandist himself Osama Bin Laden and to find that in fact many of his allegations against us are somewhat justified when viewed from a "if it were to happen to us" perspective. The actions of these four added yet another "transgression" to the list, and a bleaker outlook for a future where we can move away from this self-destructive lifestyle of warfarism in our overseas foreign policy. I don't mind for a minute throwing these traitors under a bus, and I hope it's packed full of passengers for the fullest effect.

And now we see the two extremes.

On the one side we have people wanting to give these guys a medal and talking about how much worse they would have treated the enemy dead. And on the other we have... this. Castration? Traitors? Hyperbole.

I had thought my melodrama meter couldn't get pegged any further than the guy who spouted all those tired, cliche' lines about "the arena" and what it means to be a "warrior". It appears I was wrong.

spirit_eyes
01-18-2012, 06:12 PM
my first reaction when i heard this was, laughing. "they PISSED on them??" :) :)
my next reaction was, who screwed up and got it filmed??:( :(

i think if the truth was ever told (and it probably shouldn't be, at this point), they guys in WW1, WW2, vietnam did much worse. and what the hell do you expect? sitting on a couch, beer, pop corn, watching the news, and you have a right to say something about the guys in the field? i quote a saying the vietnam vets like "if you ain't been there, shut your mouth".
and since i ain't been there, i can only guess why they did it. at least i put some time on ad, unlike a lot of the morons.

AJBIGJ
01-18-2012, 09:01 PM
And now we see the two extremes.

On the one side we have people wanting to give these guys a medal and talking about how much worse they would have treated the enemy dead. And on the other we have... this. Castration? Traitors? Hyperbole.

I had thought my melodrama meter couldn't get pegged any further than the guy who spouted all those tired, cliche' lines about "the arena" and what it means to be a "warrior". It appears I was wrong.

Intentionally a bit exaggerated to express a point, pretty much the definition of hyperbole. I see this issue from a "Golden Rule" perspective which simply does not mean we take actions in reaction to how we've been treated but to how we would like them to treat us. It's a distinction that to me is quite important. To drag up the "We don't know what they've been through" and all of that garbage rationalization doesn't pass the common sense test of how we (should) want every other person in the world to perceive our own military. It's already an uphill battle to defend our own (admittedly very flawed) foreign policy as anything other than the US trying to become the new Rome or Fourth Reich as it is, seeing our bottom 5% tier representatives like these idiots acting like barbarians sets us back that much further. Quite frankly, I'll go the lengths of applauding this administration for any and every means they go through to make an example of these four and sending a bold and clear message that these actions will not be tolerated from people representing our nation abroad.

USMC0369
01-19-2012, 04:57 PM
Intentionally a bit exaggerated to express a point, pretty much the definition of hyperbole. I see this issue from a "Golden Rule" perspective which simply does not mean we take actions in reaction to how we've been treated but to how we would like them to treat us. It's a distinction that to me is quite important. To drag up the "We don't know what they've been through" and all of that garbage rationalization doesn't pass the common sense test of how we (should) want every other person in the world to perceive our own military. It's already an uphill battle to defend our own (admittedly very flawed) foreign policy as anything other than the US trying to become the new Rome or Fourth Reich as it is, seeing our bottom 5% tier representatives like these idiots acting like barbarians sets us back that much further. Quite frankly, I'll go the lengths of applauding this administration for any and every means they go through to make an example of these four and sending a bold and clear message that these actions will not be tolerated from people representing our nation abroad.

A much more measured response than the first. The Golden Rule can be tricky in combat, as the objective is to kill each other. If I were to treat my enemy the way I wish to be treated, I probably wouldn't shoot them so much. Still, I understand what you're saying. If I fall, I would hope my body would be treated with respect. The strategic implications of this action are not lost on me either.

As I said in the other thread about this topic, I won't defend the actions of these Marines, and I'm not the guy who says "If you haven't been there, you need to shut up". Not my style.

That being said, experience does have the benefit of providing perspective. I was still a teenager when I experienced my first firefight. Afterward, I was still incredibly amped up, and the emotions came quickly and intensely. Without even consciously thinking about it, I had stepped entirely outside of my normal headspace. Bragging about kills, laughing at the dead, playing up the machismo that we had been taught was expected in situations like this. I suppose it's a coping mechanism; helps dampen the extreme fear and insecurity that comes with near death or extreme violence.

Nobody I've served with has ever done anything disgraceful to enemy dead or prisoners. I've since learned to train myself and my Marines to understand what goes on both physically and psychologically when these types of events take place, and I don't tolerate the typical grandstanding or braggadocio that normally accompanies men in this line of work. I try my best to train my Marines to the point where emotions are out of the equation entirely.

Doesn't mean I don't understand what those guys were (or weren't) thinking about when they did what they did. To see the event in a vacuum, without any context, makes them look like callous monsters. When I see it, I see immaturity and the lack of proper training or leadership. Not good things, but not irredeemable either.

Either way, rest assured they will pay for this dearly. They set themselves on the world stage, and they will be judged according to its rules.

AJBIGJ
01-19-2012, 05:33 PM
A much more measured response than the first. The Golden Rule can be tricky in combat, as the objective is to kill each other. If I were to treat my enemy the way I wish to be treated, I probably wouldn't shoot them so much. Still, I understand what you're saying. If I fall, I would hope my body would be treated with respect. The strategic implications of this action are not lost on me either.

As I said in the other thread about this topic, I won't defend the actions of these Marines, and I'm not the guy who says "If you haven't been there, you need to shut up". Not my style.

That being said, experience does have the benefit of providing perspective. I was still a teenager when I experienced my first firefight. Afterward, I was still incredibly amped up, and the emotions came quickly and intensely. Without even consciously thinking about it, I had stepped entirely outside of my normal headspace. Bragging about kills, laughing at the dead, playing up the machismo that we had been taught was expected in situations like this. I suppose it's a coping mechanism; helps dampen the extreme fear and insecurity that comes with near death or extreme violence.

Nobody I've served with has ever done anything disgraceful to enemy dead or prisoners. I've since learned to train myself and my Marines to understand what goes on both physically and psychologically when these types of events take place, and I don't tolerate the typical grandstanding or braggadocio that normally accompanies men in this line of work. I try my best to train my Marines to the point where emotions are out of the equation entirely.

Doesn't mean I don't understand what those guys were (or weren't) thinking about when they did what they did. To see the event in a vacuum, without any context, makes them look like callous monsters. When I see it, I see immaturity and the lack of proper training or leadership. Not good things, but not irredeemable either.

Either way, rest assured they will pay for this dearly. They set themselves on the world stage, and they will be judged according to its rules.

I can't say I disagree with any single thing you've stated here. My initial post was intended to directly counter all of the apologists I've been seeing all over the place, in the media, facebook, MT forums, etc. Hence the choice of the use of the writing style you've identified. I don't mind the simple concept people making light of a situation that is undoubtedly quite stressful, I see no problem with that in terms of helping people cope, if it isn't done in such a blatant and very offensive and provocative manner. The difference is what this was, if we factor all the collectivist propaganda and demagoguery out of the conversation and look at this as four individual human beings taking such actions against other individual beings there is never a situation where we should condone or support such behavior.

Like I've stated before, my biggest concern is the countless, not necessarily innocent, but definitely not so guilty lives being put at risk by making this such a spectacle. I remember the images the beheading videos invoked so many years prior and considering things in hindsight I can imagine how something like this can affect those individuals who are prone to making decisions about whether they will support (or even just not actively resist) our cause there, and that likely amounts to quite a few individuals making that final decision about taking up arms against our cause. While labeling the Marines as "traitors" is in fact a very strong term, considering the second and third degree consequences of these actions were more of a factor of ignorance than maliciousness, the fact that so many human lives are endangered by these negligent actions makes the label far closer to the reality than I would like. I'd place the severity of the long-term consequences of these actions at almost parity with anything Al Awlaki was accused of, and we assassinated him absent due process, even if the intentions weren't quite the same. I have no problem seeing them suffer the wrath of the American Justice system in this particular instance.

Banned
01-19-2012, 05:36 PM
I find the machismo you speak of not just interesting in Marines, but in the armchair generals. I read "scholarly" articles in Foreign Policy Magazine and the NYT - talking about the GWOT, and a possible strike against Iran - and you can just see the erotic excitement oozing out from between the lines. Like the guy is getting hard just thinking about us bombing Iranians.

Another case in point - the recent Occupy Wallstreet protests. Why do people who hate "big government" get excited at seeing cops marching around in big, black, and hard riot gear beating the shit out of everybody? Oh, and when a mainstream author writes about our glorious law enforcement macing random teenagers - he doesn't say "cops", he says "police officers", who were just "defending themselves" - again, its like the guy has his other hand down his freakin pants while he's typing.

/rant off

USMC0369
01-19-2012, 06:30 PM
I can't say I disagree with any single thing you've stated here. My initial post was intended to directly counter all of the apologists I've been seeing all over the place, in the media, facebook, MT forums, etc. Hence the choice of the use of the writing style you've identified. I don't mind the simple concept people making light of a situation that is undoubtedly quite stressful, I see no problem with that in terms of helping people cope, if it isn't done in such a blatant and very offensive and provocative manner. The difference is what this was, if we factor all the collectivist propaganda and demagoguery out of the conversation and look at this as four individual human beings taking such actions against other individual beings there is never a situation where we should condone or support such behavior.

Like I've stated before, my biggest concern is the countless, not necessarily innocent, but definitely not so guilty lives being put at risk by making this such a spectacle. I remember the images the beheading videos invoked so many years prior and considering things in hindsight I can imagine how something like this can affect those individuals who are prone to making decisions about whether they will support (or even just not actively resist) our cause there, and that likely amounts to quite a few individuals making that final decision about taking up arms against our cause. While labeling the Marines as "traitors" is in fact a very strong term, considering the second and third degree consequences of these actions were more of a factor of ignorance than maliciousness, the fact that so many human lives are endangered by these negligent actions makes the label far closer to the reality than I would like. I'd place the severity of the long-term consequences of these actions at almost parity with anything Al Awlaki was accused of, and we assassinated him absent due process, even if the intentions weren't quite the same. I have no problem seeing them suffer the wrath of the American Justice system in this particular instance.

You are correct: we should not condone the behavior at all. Outrage is more than justified. I do not seek to mitigate the severity of the offense committed here; I only wish to place it in perspective. We're dealing with idiots, not monsters or psychopaths.

However, I do believe that the effect this will have on the enemy is a bit overstated. The men we're fighting are a rather extreme lot, and their hatred for anything outside of their world view has a tendency to saturate every aspect of their existence. There will be a few who are on the fence, and who may see this and take up arms as a result, but they will be the minority. For most, it's deeply ingrained already.

Where we stand to lose the most is with the normal folks who aren't going to fight us, but they might not help us either. Those are the ones we have to convince, and we lost a LOT of ground with them as a result of this incident. None of them will kill us, but they'll turn a blind eye to our enemy, and they won't help us hunt that enemy down. The number of lives this will eventually cost is incalculable; there are too many variables. However we can pretty much guarantee that the number of US dead will be higher now than it would have been had this never happened.

One day those Marines are going to realize that. If they are like I suspect (immature and stupid, not evil), that thought is going to punish them FAR worse than anything the American judicial system could do.

USMC0369
01-19-2012, 06:32 PM
I find the machismo you speak of not just interesting in Marines, but in the armchair generals. I read "scholarly" articles in Foreign Policy Magazine and the NYT - talking about the GWOT, and a possible strike against Iran - and you can just see the erotic excitement oozing out from between the lines. Like the guy is getting hard just thinking about us bombing Iranians.

Another case in point - the recent Occupy Wallstreet protests. Why do people who hate "big government" get excited at seeing cops marching around in big, black, and hard riot gear beating the shit out of everybody? Oh, and when a mainstream author writes about our glorious law enforcement macing random teenagers - he doesn't say "cops", he says "police officers", who were just "defending themselves" - again, its like the guy has his other hand down his freakin pants while he's typing.

/rant off

Oh come on!! Now Wild Joker is going to come out and debate you about OWS, and this whole thread will be shot to hell.

Banned
01-19-2012, 10:20 PM
Oh come on!! Now Wild Joker is going to come out and debate you about OWS, and this whole thread will be shot to hell.

True. Bear in mind we are talking about the guy who thinks "mutation" means if you lose your arm in an IED attack, all of your children will be born with only one arm.


You are correct: we should not condone the behavior at all. Outrage is more than justified. I do not seek to mitigate the severity of the offense committed here; I only wish to place it in perspective. We're dealing with idiots, not monsters or psychopaths.

However, I do believe that the effect this will have on the enemy is a bit overstated. The men we're fighting are a rather extreme lot, and their hatred for anything outside of their world view has a tendency to saturate every aspect of their existence. There will be a few who are on the fence, and who may see this and take up arms as a result, but they will be the minority. For most, it's deeply ingrained already.

Where we stand to lose the most is with the normal folks who aren't going to fight us, but they might not help us either. Those are the ones we have to convince, and we lost a LOT of ground with them as a result of this incident. None of them will kill us, but they'll turn a blind eye to our enemy, and they won't help us hunt that enemy down. The number of lives this will eventually cost is incalculable; there are too many variables. However we can pretty much guarantee that the number of US dead will be higher now than it would have been had this never happened.

One day those Marines are going to realize that. If they are like I suspect (immature and stupid, not evil), that thought is going to punish them FAR worse than anything the American judicial system could do.

I agree with everything here - that's what COIN is (supposed to) be all about.

However, to expand upon your point about the normal people who aren't affiliated either way... turning a blind eye to the enemy is a pretty serious matter - there's an IED in the middle of a neighborhood, everybody who lives there know's about it and will avoid it, but they don't like us and are perfectly content to see an American vehicle roll right over it. You're absolutely right and I'm not disagreeing, just spelling it out a bit more for emphasis.

And honestly, it doesn't necessarily take a lot to make even a "normal" person to take up arms against us. He doesn't necessarily need to be personally affected by our occupation (like losing a relative), he could start fighting for purely existential reasons, he hears about the villainous Americans and their atrocities against Muslims, and wants to do something about it.

When the "atrocities" have to be fabricated, that requires more work for the Taliban. They have to come up with a fabrication that's believable, and is a shocking story that will spread quickly. For example I read some years back about a rumor in Iraq that our eye-pro had X-ray vision, so we could see through women's clothing. That may sound silly to us, but for a population that is extremely sensitive about their females, and a bit unfamiliar with science, that story had a signficant impact, and undermined our legitimacy.

But when somebody does something stupid - like peeing on a dead body, we're doing their work for them. They don't need to make anything up, because the story is true, and there's even a video to go with it.

USMC0369
01-19-2012, 11:04 PM
True. Bear in mind we are talking about the guy who thinks "mutation" means if you lose your arm in an IED attack, all of your children will be born with only one arm.

Stop. You two have had your opportunities to duke it out in several threads already. Christ, I'd like to get the two of you face to face. That way you could fight, fuck, or shut the hell up.


I agree with everything here - that's what COIN is (supposed to) be all about.

However, to expand upon your point about the normal people who aren't affiliated either way... turning a blind eye to the enemy is a pretty serious matter - there's an IED in the middle of a neighborhood, everybody who lives there know's about it and will avoid it, but they don't like us and are perfectly content to see an American vehicle roll right over it. You're absolutely right and I'm not disagreeing, just spelling it out a bit more for emphasis.

And honestly, it doesn't necessarily take a lot to make even a "normal" person to take up arms against us. He doesn't necessarily need to be personally affected by our occupation (like losing a relative), he could start fighting for purely existential reasons, he hears about the villainous Americans and their atrocities against Muslims, and wants to do something about it.

When the "atrocities" have to be fabricated, that requires more work for the Taliban. They have to come up with a fabrication that's believable, and is a shocking story that will spread quickly. For example I read some years back about a rumor in Iraq that our eye-pro had X-ray vision, so we could see through women's clothing. That may sound silly to us, but for a population that is extremely sensitive about their females, and a bit unfamiliar with science, that story had a signficant impact, and undermined our legitimacy.

But when somebody does something stupid - like peeing on a dead body, we're doing their work for them. They don't need to make anything up, because the story is true, and there's even a video to go with it.

This part I completely agree with, however I would point something out. As you say, this is a culture so Goddamned retarded (shit... I mean misunderstood and out of touch) that they believe that X-Ray glasses are a thing. We may make their job easier when we do stupid shit like this, but only marginally so. I have half a mind right now to head back and do a few magic tricks to make them worship me like a God-King.

In all seriousness:

As I said before, eventually these Marines are going to realize that their actions have cost lives, and that thought is going to burrow into their heads for the rest of their lives. Believe me, this will be something they carry with them forever.

Banned
01-20-2012, 05:01 AM
Stop. You two have had your opportunities to duke it out in several threads already. Christ, I'd like to get the two of you face to face. That way you could fight, fuck, or shut the hell up.

Heh. More than several.


This part I completely agree with, however I would point something out. As you say, this is a culture so Goddamned retarded (shit... I mean misunderstood and out of touch) that they believe that X-Ray glasses are a thing. We may make their job easier when we do stupid shit like this, but only marginally so. I have half a mind right now to head back and do a few magic tricks to make them worship me like a God-King.

In all honesty, the blame lies with us. We refuse to learn the language, refuse to learn the culture, because its "inferior", and we all know Muslims worship Satan anyways... if we don't blend in they're going to be hostile, and obvious questions (Like "are your sunglasses really x-ray?) aren't going to get asked. We present ourselves as "holier than thou" foreigners, we're going to be treated as such.

If I had to pick any one problem with our occupations (and there are MANY), I would say language. I'm not expecting every single ground pounder to know it (I tried, and gave up pretty quick) - but we could at least have made an effort to recruit and school for it. You blunder around a marketplace not understanding the language, you're going to get your ass handed to you real quick.


In all seriousness:

As I said before, eventually these Marines are going to realize that their actions have cost lives, and that thought is going to burrow into their heads for the rest of their lives. Believe me, this will be something they carry with them forever.

Maybe. But the human mind has a way to justify and explain away anything. Hell, half the population is convinced that we really "won" in Vietnam.

AJBIGJ
01-20-2012, 04:23 PM
Heh. More than several.

In all honesty, the blame lies with us. We refuse to learn the language, refuse to learn the culture, because its "inferior", and we all know Muslims worship Satan anyways... if we don't blend in they're going to be hostile, and obvious questions (Like "are your sunglasses really x-ray?) aren't going to get asked. We present ourselves as "holier than thou" foreigners, we're going to be treated as such.

If I had to pick any one problem with our occupations (and there are MANY), I would say language. I'm not expecting every single ground pounder to know it (I tried, and gave up pretty quick) - but we could at least have made an effort to recruit and school for it. You blunder around a marketplace not understanding the language, you're going to get your ass handed to you real quick.

Maybe. But the human mind has a way to justify and explain away anything. Hell, half the population is convinced that we really "won" in Vietnam.

The outlook is becoming quite sad, I tend to wonder sometimes if our current foreign policy has become the new "Manifest Destiny" of the Twenty First century. I tend to have deep concern for our current mindset as I freely acknowledge how quickly the Nazi movement came to full fruition from a place not all so dissimilar to our current situation and the actions taken were being rationalized away by dehumanizing the victims in one form or another. It's important to remember that for every genocidal racist even in that movement there were hundreds if not thousands or millions of apathetic bystanders rationalizing the actions of the few among them away out of a perception of some form of "necessity". It's truly a process of numbing and incremental steps in a direction by the gradual surrendering of core principles. I hope if that day truly ever comes I can find my own way to be one of those who effectively resists that movement and protect the individuals whose liberties we deprive only because of the actions of others who look similar, or believe in a similar religion, or have similar cultural histories. My worst fear is that day of the test of character is closer than we think.

spirit_eyes
01-20-2012, 05:01 PM
folks that HAVE BEEN in a fire fight have more say in this, than say, me. i did 20 years ad, but it was navy, never boots on the ground. i can understand the silly thought process that went into their actions. but where does a simple house wife, or someone who never even got into a decent fist fight, have any clue about this?
of course it was stupid. i stand behind that it was stupid to get it on any film, etc.

CommunityEditor
01-20-2012, 05:05 PM
New training ordered after urination scandal

By Dan Lamothe and Andrew deGrandpré - Staff writers
Posted : Friday Jan 13, 2012 12:38:54 EST

The three-star commander of all NATO combat troops in Afghanistan has ordered mandatory training outlining how to handle war casualties in the wake of a video surfacing online showing four Marines urinating on the corpses of suspected Taliban fighters.


Read the rest of the story here ... (http://marinecorpstimes.com/news/2012/01/marine-urination-video-taliban-curtis-scaparrotti-011312w/)

How severely — if at all — should the Corps punish the Marines filmed while appearing to desecrate the bodies of fallen enemies?

AJBIGJ
01-20-2012, 05:17 PM
folks that HAVE BEEN in a fire fight have more say in this, than say, me. i did 20 years ad, but it was navy, never boots on the ground. i can understand the silly thought process that went into their actions. but where does a simple house wife, or someone who never even got into a decent fist fight, have any clue about this?
of course it was stupid. i stand behind that it was stupid to get it on any film, etc.

You keep saying this but the question I have for you is, "Where would you draw the line?"

If they videotape the soldier's raping one of the local civilian women and post that, do we also think that's ok because they've been in combat? (and I would contend even that is different for various individuals in various countries, combat in Iraq for instance can hardly be categorized as similar to combat in Afghanistan, the style and the dynamics of the warfare is completely different between the two, so would even the veterans who've served most of the decade over in Iraq in the harshest conflicts even be qualified to state their opinion over these in Afghanistan?)

USMC called me out before on the use of hyperbole, he was quite correct in fact. I did that specifically to prove how weak this argument is that these individuals should be able to get away with just about anything just because they've been "In the shit" as it were. The actions were stupid and careless, and who knows, we've already seen an "accident" in the form of a helo crash that happened to be carrying 6 Marines in Afghanistan, not necessarily related, but does beg the average critical thinker to wonder.

If we surrender our principles out of sympathy for our other troops because it's been "tough" on them there is a danger to what we can allow to pass out of sympathetic apathy. If then, shame on us. I'd like to think if I'd been in Nazi Germany at the time of the Holocaust, I'd have the personal moral courage to take any action I could to help prevent the tragedies of the day, rather than being one of the countless millions of bystanders who apologized the actions away. Not having been I can only speculate, but I can sure look for parallel conditions to exist in my own life and do my utmost to be that advocate when potential similar situations do arise in our own times.

spirit_eyes
01-20-2012, 05:18 PM
i say punish them fairly good, since they were stupid enough to get on film. mast with stripe, money, but suspended. if they can behave for 6 months, then no harm done. kinda.

spirit_eyes
01-20-2012, 05:25 PM
peeing on a dead body is wrong. yes. more stupid than anything. a stupid "piss on you".
rape, etc. wrong, of course. i say even worse if it ends up on film. (can't believe i just said there something worse than rape)
those marines were worn out, being childish and stupid. rape is all about power, and control with a living human. (doing it with a corpse is just sick in the head). and wiping out people like the nazi did is cowardly.

AJBIGJ
01-20-2012, 05:28 PM
i say punish them fairly good, since they were stupid enough to get on film. mast with stripe, money, but suspended. if they can behave for 6 months, then no harm done. kinda.
I'm content to let the JAG types figure out that stuff, I'm plenty content with them making judgement. I more concern myself with all of those (and there are many) who marginalize the wrongness of this or worse applaud the actions because of reason X, Y, or Z. Much like in the case of rape, it is often the "innocent" bystanders who are best positioned to make the crucial difference at the crucial moment, but only if they are willing to step in at the right time. Not going to happen very often if they're cheering the assailant for their actions.

spirit_eyes
01-20-2012, 05:37 PM
i agree with if you see a wrong, and you can honestly do something about - higher rank taking charge. calling 911, or even just screaming "fire" to get attention to the situation. then you should. and if you do nothing at all, be charged as an accesory.
now, i'm not saying a crippled guy should jump into a fight to stop a rape, etc. but if he has a cell phone in working order, his butt should be on the phone giving as many details as possible. and it's fine if he gets out of site, etc to make the call. but do something to help, instead of standing around cheering.
i have a t-shirt from wicked jester - " a hero is someone who steps up when everyone else backs down".

candycane3482
01-21-2012, 08:30 PM
You keep saying this but the question I have for you is, "Where would you draw the line?"

If they videotape the soldier's raping one of the local civilian women and post that, do we also think that's ok because they've been in combat? (and I would contend even that is different for various individuals in various countries, combat in Iraq for instance can hardly be categorized as similar to combat in Afghanistan, the style and the dynamics of the warfare is completely different between the two, so would even the veterans who've served most of the decade over in Iraq in the harshest conflicts even be qualified to state their opinion over these in Afghanistan?)

USMC called me out before on the use of hyperbole, he was quite correct in fact. I did that specifically to prove how weak this argument is that these individuals should be able to get away with just about anything just because they've been "In the shit" as it were. The actions were stupid and careless, and who knows, we've already seen an "accident" in the form of a helo crash that happened to be carrying 6 Marines in Afghanistan, not necessarily related, but does beg the average critical thinker to wonder.

If we surrender our principles out of sympathy for our other troops because it's been "tough" on them there is a danger to what we can allow to pass out of sympathetic apathy. If then, shame on us. I'd like to think if I'd been in Nazi Germany at the time of the Holocaust, I'd have the personal moral courage to take any action I could to help prevent the tragedies of the day, rather than being one of the countless millions of bystanders who apologized the actions away. Not having been I can only speculate, but I can sure look for parallel conditions to exist in my own life and do my utmost to be that advocate when potential similar situations do arise in our own times.

I'm not saying what happened in Europe with the Holocaust was right but there were some people, until they saw the camps, who did not believe that the camps existed. I mean, I watched Band of Brothers again last week and when it's near the end of the war with Germany and they're out in the woods training and come up on the concentration camp - it didn't seem like they had any clue that was going on. I think that none of the soldiers realized what was happening until they liberated those camps. I mean, before that happened, I don't think a lot of people could comprehend any rational human could do that to another human being (even though genocide happened before and after and America tolerated slavery and had our own concentration camps thought not to that extreme). Although I don't think you can lump in the Holocaust to "well what they saw in combat..." That had nothing to do with the war - that was Hitler's crazy idea and his own insecurities; he just managed to get himself into a position of power where he could enact that plan. But I do find it quite ridiculous that after they liberated the camp (in BoB) and I think Winters was talking to someone and said the villagers down the road claimed "they had no idea" what was going on, I think that's bullshit. I think anyone who lived in vicinity of those camps knew something was going on when people would go in and not come back out ever.

But I think the Holocaust is incomparable to this incident. Bottom line with these Marines: they shouldn't have recorded it. I just don't understand why people think they have to record EVERYTHING and put it up on YouTube or the Internet in general. No one is perfect but damn - in this day and age to think that if you record something it's not ending up on the Internet is a bit naive.

Pullinteeth
01-21-2012, 10:14 PM
I support the Marines too. I don't support what they did though. If they get punished for it, so be it. They knew damn well that was a risk they took, yet still filmed it and put it online... Not the sharpest spoons in the drawer...

MACHINE666
01-21-2012, 11:05 PM
New training ordered after urination scandal

By Dan Lamothe and Andrew deGrandpré - Staff writers
Posted : Friday Jan 13, 2012 12:38:54 EST

The three-star commander of all NATO combat troops in Afghanistan has ordered mandatory training outlining how to handle war casualties in the wake of a video surfacing online showing four Marines urinating on the corpses of suspected Taliban fighters.


Read the rest of the story here ... (http://marinecorpstimes.com/news/2012/01/marine-urination-video-taliban-curtis-scaparrotti-011312w/)

How severely — if at all — should the Corps punish the Marines filmed while appearing to desecrate the bodies of fallen enemies?

I will not bow to political-correctness, unlike the others here who have, and say that these Marines should not have ANY disciplinary action brought against them. Zero. Zilch. Nicht. The only way we have a chance in hell of winning this war is to fight fire with fire.

AJBIGJ
01-22-2012, 12:08 AM
I will not bow to political-correctness, unlike the others here who have, and say that these Marines should not have ANY disciplinary action brought against them. Zero. Zilch. Nicht. The only way we have a chance in hell of winning this war is to fight fire with fire.

It's not about political correctness, it's about principal. If you want a good example of winning wars, one need look no further than Nazi Germany pre-1943. You tout to vote Libertarian, yet you promote collectivism far more than any single progressive I've ever witnessed. If you cannot equate Afghan individuals to American Individuals, you might as well change your damned signature line, because it's transparently hypocritical.

AJBIGJ
01-22-2012, 12:18 AM
But I think the Holocaust is incomparable to this incident. Bottom line with these Marines: they shouldn't have recorded it. I just don't understand why people think they have to record EVERYTHING and put it up on YouTube or the Internet in general. No one is perfect but damn - in this day and age to think that if you record something it's not ending up on the Internet is a bit naive.

So, to be absolutely clear, you think no single German acted out of ignorance rather than a purely evil nature that caused them to dehumanize the Jewish (and other) populace?

MACHINE666
01-22-2012, 12:33 AM
It's not about political correctness, it's about principal. If you want a good example of winning wars, one need look no further than Nazi Germany pre-1943. You tout to vote Libertarian, yet you promote collectivism far more than any single progressive I've ever witnessed. If you cannot equate Afghan individuals to American Individuals, you might as well change your damned signature line, because it's transparently hypocritical.

SO AJ, does every Republican follow their political party's agenda blindly? Does every Democrat agree with whatever their party is pumping out? Does every Liberal believe whatever manifesto their granola friends are spouting? Of course not.

I don't agree with gay marriage (which is on the Libertarian Party ticket), and for the longest time I was being reticent as to our treatment of these illegal enemy combatants. If we were fighting a formal army, then yes, I would agree with LOAC and the Geneva Conventions, but we're not. We're fighting religious nut-jobs who only respect the bigger gun and will fight amongst one another as to who is more 'muslim' than the other, when they're not turning their attention towards us.

But I still support prostitution, legalizing marijuana, and minimizing our role internationally. I support our liberties and our Free-Market Economy but think our government has no right protecting the criminals on Wall Street from being prosecuted and pushing these corporate agendas.

Plus I also claim no responsibilty if you take anything I say to have any credibility. I guess you missed that part of the disclaimer.

:D :D :D :D :D

AJBIGJ
01-22-2012, 12:41 AM
SO AJ, does every Republican follow their political party's agenda blindly? Does every Democrat agree with whatever their party is pumping out? Does every Liberal believe whatever manifesto their granola friends are spouting? Of course not.

I don't agree with gay marriage (which is on the Libertarian Party ticket), and for the longest time I was being reticent as to our treatment of these illegal enemy combatants. If we were fighting a formal army, then yes, I would agree with LOAC and the Geneva Conventions, but we're not. We're fighting religious nut-jobs who only respect the bigger gun and will fight amongst one another as to who is more 'muslim' than the other, when they're not turning their attention towards us.

But I still support prostitution, legalizing marijuana, and minimizing our role internationally. I support our liberties and our Free-Market Economy but think our government has no right protecting the criminals on Wall Street from being prosecuted and pushing these corporate agendas.

Plus I also claim no responsibilty if you take anything I say to have any credibility. I guess you missed that part of the disclaimer.

:D :D :D :D :D

Well, it leaves us in a pickle then doesn't it, are you joking when you say we need to resort to any or all means to defeat this enemy, are you joking or dead serious? Do you honestly believe that pissing on their corpses and broadcasting on the interweb helps our cause. If you are completely unable to take a position might as well stick to the "Machinisms" thread and let the adults do the talking.

MACHINE666
01-22-2012, 12:53 AM
Well, it leaves us in a pickle then doesn't it, are you joking when you say we need to resort to any or all means to defeat this enemy, are you joking or dead serious? Do you honestly believe that pissing on their corpses and broadcasting on the interweb helps our cause. If you are completely unable to take a position might as well stick to the "Machinisms" thread and let the adults do the talking.

Or you can quit being such a douche and allow people to have their own opinions!

AJBIGJ
01-22-2012, 01:01 AM
Or you can quit being such a douche and allow people to have their own opinions!

It'd help me if I knew what that opinion truly was, and saw it supported by legitimate support rather than smiley faces.

Banned
01-22-2012, 01:58 AM
You keep saying this but the question I have for you is, "Where would you draw the line?"

If they videotape the soldier's raping one of the local civilian women and post that, do we also think that's ok because they've been in combat? (and I would contend even that is different for various individuals in various countries, combat in Iraq for instance can hardly be categorized as similar to combat in Afghanistan, the style and the dynamics of the warfare is completely different between the two, so would even the veterans who've served most of the decade over in Iraq in the harshest conflicts even be qualified to state their opinion over these in Afghanistan?)

USMC called me out before on the use of hyperbole, he was quite correct in fact. I did that specifically to prove how weak this argument is that these individuals should be able to get away with just about anything just because they've been "In the shit" as it were. The actions were stupid and careless, and who knows, we've already seen an "accident" in the form of a helo crash that happened to be carrying 6 Marines in Afghanistan, not necessarily related, but does beg the average critical thinker to wonder.

If we surrender our principles out of sympathy for our other troops because it's been "tough" on them there is a danger to what we can allow to pass out of sympathetic apathy. If then, shame on us. I'd like to think if I'd been in Nazi Germany at the time of the Holocaust, I'd have the personal moral courage to take any action I could to help prevent the tragedies of the day, rather than being one of the countless millions of bystanders who apologized the actions away. Not having been I can only speculate, but I can sure look for parallel conditions to exist in my own life and do my utmost to be that advocate when potential similar situations do arise in our own times.

The unfortunate reality is that 99% of modern Americans, or modern anybody, are perfectly capable of being Nazis in that time and setting. People will commit just about any monstrosity if there's an external authority figure to take responsibility for it.

Hence my Orwell quote in my signature - any "crime" is perfectly a-okay if "our" side does it.

Case in point: an Iranian politician says Israel needs to be "wiped out". The American media goes hysterical, and war-hawks ramble about how this is proof we need to invade Iran - even YEARS after the comment was made.

An American politician (McCain) says we need to "bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran". No big deal. It was just a "joke".

AJBIGJ
01-22-2012, 02:03 AM
The unfortunate reality is that 99% of modern Americans, or modern anybody, are perfectly capable of being Nazis in that time and setting. People will commit just about any monstrosity if there's an external authority figure to take responsibility for it.

Hence my Orwell quote in my signature - any "crime" is perfectly a-okay if "our" side does it.

Case in point: an Iranian politician says Israel needs to be "wiped out". The American media goes hysterical, and war-hawks ramble about how this is proof we need to invade Iran - even YEARS after the comment was made.

An American politician (McCain) says we need to "bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran". No big deal. It was just a "joke".

I tend to agree, I think the most dangerous assumption we can make is that we are personally immune towards committing the atrocities of that era. It makes us quite complacent in terms of the gradual surrendering of our principles which make us ask the simple "WTF?"

Banned
01-22-2012, 02:11 AM
I tend to agree, I think the most dangerous assumption we can make is that we are personally immune towards committing the atrocities of that era. It makes us quite complacent in terms of the gradual surrendering of our principles which make us ask the simple "WTF?"

No precedent is established until the other side consents to it. Bush started the worldwide war on all things "un-American", and Obama made it mainstream. Bush was evil for illegally invading Iraq. Obama was just being "pragmatic" for illegally invading Libya, Yemen, Pakistan, all without that nuisance of an actual declaration of war or congressional approval.

AJBIGJ
01-22-2012, 02:33 AM
No precedent is established until the other side consents to it. Bush started the worldwide war on all things "un-American", and Obama made it mainstream. Bush was evil for illegally invading Iraq. Obama was just being "pragmatic" for illegally invading Libya, Yemen, Pakistan, all without that nuisance of an actual declaration of war or congressional approval.

It is funny how that works, isn't it?

Banned
01-22-2012, 03:07 AM
It's logical when you think about it. "Only Nixon can go to China".

AJBIGJ
01-22-2012, 03:13 AM
It's logical when you think about it. "Only Nixon can go to China".

Is it nerdy of me to think of Star Trek VI?

MACHINE666
01-22-2012, 08:02 PM
It'd help me if I knew what that opinion truly was, and saw it supported by legitimate support rather than smiley faces.

AJ if you can't figure out by now what's worth replying to and what's worth just letting go and letting me have, then you need to just disregard anything I say from now on. I ignore alot of the political banter here because agree or disagree, people are going to have their opinions and little to nothing is going to sway them from that belief. You can give me every fact in the world as to why I should not smoke or eat a greasy cheeseburger, but at the end of the day I'm still going to do it. My supporting the Marines or anyone else who is doing the world a favor and taking out these religious dick-holes is not going to change either, no matter what evidence is presented for or against it. It's so easy for us to all play Armchair Generals from the privacy of our laptops and in the safety of our homes, yet it's another to be in a real-life sitch where shit has gone horribly wrong and you're a part of it whether you like it or not. In the meantime, Air Force Times will dig on the drama and most likely make money off our banter in some way....

Banned
01-23-2012, 01:02 AM
AJ if you can't figure out by now what's worth replying to and what's worth just letting go and letting me have, then you need to just disregard anything I say from now on. I ignore alot of the political banter here because agree or disagree, people are going to have their opinions and little to nothing is going to sway them from that belief. You can give me every fact in the world as to why I should not smoke or eat a greasy cheeseburger, but at the end of the day I'm still going to do it. My supporting the Marines or anyone else who is doing the world a favor and taking out these religious dick-holes is not going to change either, no matter what evidence is presented for or against it. It's so easy for us to all play Armchair Generals from the privacy of our laptops and in the safety of our homes, yet it's another to be in a real-life sitch where shit has gone horribly wrong and you're a part of it whether you like it or not. In the meantime, Air Force Times will dig on the drama and most likely make money off our banter in some way....

The point, which the facts support, is that incidents like this HURT our effort against the "religious dick-holes", and encourage more people to support them. The moral highground is just as important, arguably much more important, than the physical one.

MACHINE666
01-23-2012, 01:52 PM
Joe, we're fighting scum. Do you take such a kind approach when squashing a housefly or setting a mouse trap?

At the expense of digging myself into a hole here, every group of shit-head terrorists we've gone up against from Somalia in 1993 to present have always done the worst to their POWs, even when it was uncalled for. They view us as the "Great Satan" and promoting a Zionistic agenda. They will quickly use our tolerance against us and have been doing so for the past 20 - 30 years. And they've predominantly been Muslim too. Everyone from Major Hassan all the way back to the 1972 Munich massacres. If people want to use facts, then if 'those' facts don't speak as to the true face of these villians, then nothing does.

CABRYANT41234
01-23-2012, 03:24 PM
For those that support the incident.

Afghan Claims He Killed French Troops Over US Abuse Video


January 23, 2012
Agence France-Presse


http://images.military.com/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Type&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=image%2Fjpeg&blobheadervalue2=inline%3Bfilename%3Dmarines-video-399.jpg&blobkey=id&blobnocache=false&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=1210009391809&ssbinary=true
An Afghan soldier who shot dead four French troops has said he did it because of a recent video showing U.S. Marines urinating on the dead bodies of Taliban insurgents, security sources told AFP

http://www.military.com/news/article/afghan-claims-he-killed-french-troops-over-us-abuse-video.html?ESRC=eb.nl

AJBIGJ
01-23-2012, 04:51 PM
"Nature is cruel; therefore we are also entitled to be cruel." Adolf Hitler

Again though, and most importantly, these actions taken by these morons are not helping our cause, they are in fact directly contrary to our ability to succeed in this conflict, whatever our metric for "success" is. (Which is another issue, but not particularly pertinent in this instance.) If eradication of the "potential hostiles" is the goal, no further American lives are required, if we've zero regard for potential collateral damage. In most cases and if you ask most people, that is not the goal. Which means that eventually we will have to detach from this conflict with Afghan people still living there. How those people relate to us at that time is something that those who do not get tunnel vision towards the actions of some individuals and instead look at the long term effects may wish to think about. It doesn't help that these videos allow the instigators to replace false Jihad propaganda with genuine material. To detach from this engagement in the smoothest and cleanest manner achievable, it is key that our collective actions are as close as achievable to being above reproach as it is a lot easier to surrender to or treatise with a force that you know will treat you humanely after the fact. I can tell you have little regard or respect for the lives of Afghan nationals, whether they are actively engaged in terrorist activities or not, while that is in direct opposition to the core fundamental libertarian principle of individual rights, it is your opinion as you said so I'll leave it as such. I hope your regard is at least decent for American lives, which are also at the detriment of the actions of these four. I know the phrase "Once a Marine, always a Marine" is one of the core traditions of the USMC, but I wouldn't mind in this case if a few licenses were revoked, as I would hate to see the reputation of my brother servicemen tarnished by these nimwads.

Banned
01-23-2012, 06:01 PM
Joe, we're fighting scum. Do you take such a kind approach when squashing a housefly or setting a mouse trap?

I don't know, do flies and mice lay IEDs and overrun FOBs?


At the expense of digging myself into a hole here, every group of shit-head terrorists we've gone up against from Somalia in 1993 to present have always done the worst to their POWs, even when it was uncalled for.

So have we.

And I am by no means defending terrorists - but not "every group" has tortured American POWs. Both Michael Durant (Mogadishu) and Jessica Lynch were treated fairly well while in captivity.


They view us as the "Great Satan" and promoting a Zionistic agenda.

Maybe if we stopped bombing them and funneling billions of dollars and weapons to Israel, who in turn bombs them some more... they wouldn't feel that way.


They will quickly use our tolerance against us and have been doing so for the past 20 - 30 years. And they've predominantly been Muslim too. Everyone from Major Hassan all the way back to the 1972 Munich massacres. If people want to use facts, then if 'those' facts don't speak as to the true face of these villians, then nothing does.

Evading the point with appeals to emotion.

TJMAC77SP
01-23-2012, 06:08 PM
......
Case in point: an Iranian politician says Israel needs to be "wiped out". The American media goes hysterical, and war-hawks ramble about how this is proof we need to invade Iran - even YEARS after the comment was made.

An American politician (McCain) says we need to "bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran". No big deal. It was just a "joke".

Does it matter at all if one statement is made in complete earnest and the other a bad attempt at humor?

Banned
01-23-2012, 06:33 PM
Does it matter at all if one statement is made in complete earnest and the other a bad attempt at humor?

I see no evidence for that. McCain has been pretty clear about his stance on Iran.

MACHINE666
01-24-2012, 09:16 PM
"Nature is cruel; therefore we are also entitled to be cruel." Adolf Hitler

Again though, and most importantly, these actions taken by these morons are not helping our cause, they are in fact directly contrary to our ability to succeed in this conflict, whatever our metric for "success" is. (Which is another issue, but not particularly pertinent in this instance.) If eradication of the "potential hostiles" is the goal, no further American lives are required, if we've zero regard for potential collateral damage. In most cases and if you ask most people, that is not the goal. Which means that eventually we will have to detach from this conflict with Afghan people still living there. How those people relate to us at that time is something that those who do not get tunnel vision towards the actions of some individuals and instead look at the long term effects may wish to think about. It doesn't help that these videos allow the instigators to replace false Jihad propaganda with genuine material. To detach from this engagement in the smoothest and cleanest manner achievable, it is key that our collective actions are as close as achievable to being above reproach as it is a lot easier to surrender to or treatise with a force that you know will treat you humanely after the fact. I can tell you have little regard or respect for the lives of Afghan nationals, whether they are actively engaged in terrorist activities or not, while that is in direct opposition to the core fundamental libertarian principle of individual rights, it is your opinion as you said so I'll leave it as such. I hope your regard is at least decent for American lives, which are also at the detriment of the actions of these four. I know the phrase "Once a Marine, always a Marine" is one of the core traditions of the USMC, but I wouldn't mind in this case if a few licenses were revoked, as I would hate to see the reputation of my brother servicemen tarnished by these nimwads.

Yep, I figured it was only a matter of time before someone pulled this card on me.

Let me say it like this: the terrorists don't care if we're nice or not. The world over knows how wonderful we are at giving them a free hand-out, from church drives to humanitarian assistance coordinated by the US military. Their clerics and their so-called 'leaders' brain-wash them from the get-go.

Terrorists blow shit up and kill people because they have no respect for human life. City buses, town markets, banks, buildings, and places of no military signficance. Why? Because they can.

Nowadays a terrorist has a friendlier label - 'jihadist', 'militant', 'insurgent' - terms dreamed up by the douchebag media types who are trying to placate a handful of shit-heads, comparatively speaking.

Terrorists do NOT want to negotiate, they do NOT want to show tolerance, and are willing to take as many people as they can for their 'cause' - innocent by-standers who want to do nothing more than live their lives and not be bothered.

They are rabid dogs who need to be put down. Filth. A bane to the good people everywhere who want to live in peace.

And to answer your question, yes I hold American lives in higher regard. I stood there in person and saw the caskets of those two airmen who died at Frankfurt last year, as their motorcade drove by on Ramstein Air Base. Anyone who says I haven't seen first-hand the result of what we're up against can guess again.

MACHINE666
01-24-2012, 09:30 PM
I don't know, do flies and mice lay IEDs and overrun FOBs?



So have we.

And I am by no means defending terrorists - but not "every group" has tortured American POWs. Both Michael Durant (Mogadishu) and Jessica Lynch were treated fairly well while in captivity.



Maybe if we stopped bombing them and funneling billions of dollars and weapons to Israel, who in turn bombs them some more... they wouldn't feel that way.



Evading the point with appeals to emotion.

The way you make your posts here Joe, I have difficulty in believing that you're NOT defending the terrorists.

If I am not mistaken, Jessica Lynch was raped by her captors, and Michael Durant's treatment while in captivity was still barbaric. According to this report, he had been tied up to a dog leash at one point, and also shot in the back after he had been detained.

http://inquirer.philly.com/packages/somalia/dec12/default12.asp

Bottom line is that neither you nor anyone else here is going to change my mind when it comes to dealing with terrorists, and likewise, I will never convince you nor AJ or anyone else who agrees with your perspective, even if you lost family to them somewhere down the road (and I do not wish that on anyone, nor do I jest about it). Let's just agree to disagree and move on.

candycane3482
01-24-2012, 10:16 PM
Yep, I figured it was only a matter of time before someone pulled this card on me.

Let me say it like this: the terrorists don't care if we're nice or not. The world over knows how wonderful we are at giving them a free hand-out, from church drives to humanitarian assistance coordinated by the US military. Their clerics and their so-called 'leaders' brain-wash them from the get-go.

Terrorists blow shit up and kill people because they have no respect for human life. City buses, town markets, banks, buildings, and places of no military signficance. Why? Because they can.

Nowadays a terrorist has a friendlier label - 'jihadist', 'militant', 'insurgent' - terms dreamed up by the douchebag media types who are trying to placate a handful of shit-heads, comparatively speaking.

Terrorists do NOT want to negotiate, they do NOT want to show tolerance, and are willing to take as many people as they can for their 'cause' - innocent by-standers who want to do nothing more than live their lives and not be bothered.

They are rabid dogs who need to be put down. Filth. A bane to the good people everywhere who want to live in peace.

And to answer your question, yes I hold American lives in higher regard. I stood there in person and saw the caskets of those two airmen who died at Frankfurt last year, as their motorcade drove by on Ramstein Air Base. Anyone who says I haven't seen first-hand the result of what we're up against can guess again.

Actually insurgent has been around for awhile. Technically, the Founders of America during the Revolution were "insurgents" or "terrorists" according to England. Also - the Taliban leadership wants to negotiate...they are a little different than Al Qaeda. They're just pissed they lost control of Afghanistan. Al Qaeda just pulled in all the former Iraqi Army soldiers who were fired, the Baathists...anyone who was just plain pissed at America in Iraq.

The rest of it - you're right terrorists don't care if we're "nice" or not.

candycane3482
01-24-2012, 10:20 PM
The way you make your posts here Joe, I have difficulty in believing that you're NOT defending the terrorists.

If I am not mistaken, Jessica Lynch was raped by her captors, and Michael Durant's treatment while in captivity was still barbaric. According to this report, he had been tied up to a dog leash at one point, and also shot in the back after he had been detained.

http://inquirer.philly.com/packages/somalia/dec12/default12.asp

Bottom line is that neither you nor anyone else here is going to change my mind when it comes to dealing with terrorists, and likewise, I will never convince you nor AJ or anyone else who agrees with your perspective, even if you lost family to them somewhere down the road (and I do not wish that on anyone, nor do I jest about it). Let's just agree to disagree and move on.

That was never really concrete whether or not she was sexually abused while in captivity. SHE has no memory of it so she can't say whether or not she was. I think somewhere in the investigation one of the Iraqi doctors said she may have been sexually abused. But from even her own account she said that she was not harmed by her captors and that the hospital staff took excellent care of her and said that the story the Army told was a lie.

Durant - I don't see how that was being "treated fairly well."

Banned
01-24-2012, 11:11 PM
Yep, I figured it was only a matter of time before someone pulled this card on me.

Let me say it like this: the terrorists don't care if we're nice or not. The world over knows how wonderful we are at giving them a free hand-out, from church drives to humanitarian assistance coordinated by the US military. Their clerics and their so-called 'leaders' brain-wash them from the get-go.

Terrorists blow shit up and kill people because they have no respect for human life. City buses, town markets, banks, buildings, and places of no military signficance. Why? Because they can.

Nowadays a terrorist has a friendlier label - 'jihadist', 'militant', 'insurgent' - terms dreamed up by the douchebag media types who are trying to placate a handful of shit-heads, comparatively speaking.

Terrorists do NOT want to negotiate, they do NOT want to show tolerance, and are willing to take as many people as they can for their 'cause' - innocent by-standers who want to do nothing more than live their lives and not be bothered.

They are rabid dogs who need to be put down. Filth. A bane to the good people everywhere who want to live in peace.

And to answer your question, yes I hold American lives in higher regard. I stood there in person and saw the caskets of those two airmen who died at Frankfurt last year, as their motorcade drove by on Ramstein Air Base. Anyone who says I haven't seen first-hand the result of what we're up against can guess again.

In all honesty - this whole post is kinda silly. First off, "terrorist" is just a generic term - a fighter who uses fear as a weapon - usually for a political/ideological cause - his goal is regime change: tear down the government or social order he hates with the hopes of replacing it with one he likes. This has absolutely NOTHING to do with any one particular ideology or religion. He could be an Anarchist, a Communist, a Capitalist, a Muslim, a Christian, a Jew, an Atheist, a Hindu... and that's just assuming he's tied to an ideology - he could be part of a racial or tribal war, which runs much older and deeper than conventional politics or religion.

Take Israel for example. Yes, there's ideology - Islam versus Zionism - but we could just as easily categorize this as a tribal war. These people have been fighting for millenia, before modern Judaism, and long before Islam. Yes, they have a different religion, but they are also of a different race, and different language.

Secondly, to say they cannot be negotiated with is just stupid. They have political objectives and goals just like everyone else. To see them as subhuman is not only borderline fantasy - its counterproductive. Understand the enemy, know his objectives, know his strengths, know his weaknesses, understand his values. That's the key to victory. I know you think you're hardcore for refusing to acknowledge that, but this attitude will get us exactly NOWHERE.

And thirdly, maybe its true the Taliban don't care if we're nice or not - but it is beneficial to them for us to be cruel. Because they know that the real battlefield is the moral one. They have to prove to the people that we are evil, and must be repelled at all costs. Likewise, we have to prove to the people that supporting the Taliban is not in their best interests.


The way you make your posts here Joe, I have difficulty in believing that you're NOT defending the terrorists.

I try to look at it from a neutral perspective. As people of the times, we're colored by our own prejudices and loyalties. How will people 500 years from now look at these wars? Will it be so obvious to them who the "good guys" and "bad guys" were? I'll bet the Romans were equally convinced they were the "good guys", heroically fighting the "barbarian hordes".


If I am not mistaken, Jessica Lynch was raped by her captors,

After the trauma of the vehicle crash, she lost 3 hours. Its possible - likely even, and the medical examination strongly suggests that. But you are so quick to brand all Muslims as evil terrorists you ignore the fact that she was rescued by Iraqis, and treated in an Iraqi hospital. I doubt you will ever accept that basic fact, because it contradicts your viewpoint of the world.


and Michael Durant's treatment while in captivity was still barbaric. According to this report, he had been tied up to a dog leash at one point, and also shot in the back after he had been detained.

http://inquirer.philly.com/packages/somalia/dec12/default12.asp

I wasn't aware that he had been shot. Regardless, my point still stands. The two most hated people in the world are the sniper, and the pilot. Both for the same reason - because they can hurt you, but you can't hurt them back. In the American Civil War captured snipers were frequently executed on the spot. Likewise pilots often get a less than warm reception from the people on the ground. Its interesting that the Somali militants bothered to rescue him from the pissed off mob at all. If I had to wager a guess its because a live prisoner is a good bargaining chip.


Bottom line is that neither you nor anyone else here is going to change my mind when it comes to dealing with terrorists, and likewise, I will never convince you nor AJ or anyone else who agrees with your perspective, even if you lost family to them somewhere down the road (and I do not wish that on anyone, nor do I jest about it). Let's just agree to disagree and move on.

That is the attitude that will not only lose the war, and in the long run, possibly destroy America

AJBIGJ
01-25-2012, 02:51 PM
Nowadays a terrorist has a friendlier label - 'jihadist', 'militant', 'insurgent' - terms dreamed up by the douchebag media types who are trying to placate a handful of shit-heads, comparatively speaking.

Terrorists do NOT want to negotiate, they do NOT want to show tolerance, and are willing to take as many people as they can for their 'cause' - innocent by-standers who want to do nothing more than live their lives and not be bothered.

They are rabid dogs who need to be put down. Filth. A bane to the good people everywhere who want to live in peace.

And to answer your question, yes I hold American lives in higher regard. I stood there in person and saw the caskets of those two airmen who died at Frankfurt last year, as their motorcade drove by on Ramstein Air Base. Anyone who says I haven't seen first-hand the result of what we're up against can guess again.

I would replace the word "friendlier" with "more accurate". I tend to wonder if you even know that there are differences between the individual Muslim cultures in the Middle East. You seem ready enough to paint every single individual over there with the same brush, despite the fact that they are all INDIVIDUALS, capable of acting, reacting, and thinking as such, despite the rough lifestyles many (not necessarily all) have been raised under. It's important, nay crucial, that we develop the understanding, much as JB has stated, of the true nature of every individual we so readily classify as enemy. The first lesson we can learn about them is they may not (and probably aren't) acting all towards the same stereotypical set of goals. Engaging them as individuals can allow us to apply the appropriate amount of force (or even better diplomacy) to breakdown any threat and possibly leverage their contributions as an asset.

It is funny you mention "death" so frequently, this type of phraseology is the typical demagoguery the hawks like to use to incite emotion into the intellectually-lazy masses to avoid having them actually becoming educated on the subject. Way to go there being an independent thinker! I understand death from this enemy altogether to well, an admired and respected uncle of mine who retired from the USAF and subsequently served again in a civilian capacity in Iraq fell victim to an IED several years ago. The fact is though, that is a genuine risk when we engage in foreign warfare so readily and eagerly. I also know that simply equating the individuals responsible for that IED with the individuals these faux-Marines up and decided to pee on is faulty logic and completely in opposition to the ideology I strongly believe in that individuals will and always shall be responsible for individual actions and should not be held responsible for the collectivist steroetypes being made against their government, cultural background, race, ethnicity, religion, or otherwise.

I jump on the Nazi train because it's extremely important to realize, not all Germans during the 1930's-1940's were Nazi's directly responsible for the deaths of so many during that era. The vast majority were apathetic and rationalizing bystanders who felt the more "extreme" actions (at least the few that were not effectively hidden from them) could be excused away as a necessity during especially trying times for that nation in its history. Plus not only were those Jews obviously greedy and not one of their members of the superior Aryan race but since they didn't think, act, and live their lives like "normal" Germans, they didn't deserve the same level of consideration in the fashion in which they were treated, at least that's what their government convinced them to believe. Sounds familiar to me, it's exactly what has happened with our country over the last decade.

If you wish to continue to disagree there is very little I can do to force you to change, but I will be disappointed because I have always felt you not to be among the particularly close-minded who so readily jump to assumptions about individuals who they know absolutely nothing about other than whom they may or may not be associated with.

Banned
01-26-2012, 03:11 AM
I read Glenn Greenwald's article from yesterday - these times are getting pretty scary, I think.

The Rules of American Justice are quite clear:

(1) If you are a high-ranking government official who commits war crimes, you will receive full-scale immunity, both civil and criminal, and will have the American President demand that all citizens Look Forward, Not Backward.

(2) If you are a low-ranking member of the military, you will receive relatively trivial punishments in order to protect higher-ranking officials and cast the appearance of accountability. [Haditha]

(3) If you are a victim of American war crimes, you are a non-person with no legal rights or even any entitlement to see the inside of a courtroom.

(4) If you talk publicly about any of these war crimes, you have committed the Gravest Crime — you are guilty of espionage – and will have the full weight of the American criminal justice system come crashing down upon you.

http://www.salon.com/2012/01/24/rules_of_american_justice_a_tale_of_three_cases/

MACHINE666
01-28-2012, 12:55 AM
I would replace the word "friendlier" with "more accurate". I tend to wonder if you even know that there are differences between the individual Muslim cultures in the Middle East. You seem ready enough to paint every single individual over there with the same brush, despite the fact that they are all INDIVIDUALS, capable of acting, reacting, and thinking as such, despite the rough lifestyles many (not necessarily all) have been raised under. It's important, nay crucial, that we develop the understanding, much as JB has stated, of the true nature of every individual we so readily classify as enemy. The first lesson we can learn about them is they may not (and probably aren't) acting all towards the same stereotypical set of goals. Engaging them as individuals can allow us to apply the appropriate amount of force (or even better diplomacy) to breakdown any threat and possibly leverage their contributions as an asset.

It is funny you mention "death" so frequently, this type of phraseology is the typical demagoguery the hawks like to use to incite emotion into the intellectually-lazy masses to avoid having them actually becoming educated on the subject. Way to go there being an independent thinker! I understand death from this enemy altogether to well, an admired and respected uncle of mine who retired from the USAF and subsequently served again in a civilian capacity in Iraq fell victim to an IED several years ago. The fact is though, that is a genuine risk when we engage in foreign warfare so readily and eagerly. I also know that simply equating the individuals responsible for that IED with the individuals these faux-Marines up and decided to pee on is faulty logic and completely in opposition to the ideology I strongly believe in that individuals will and always shall be responsible for individual actions and should not be held responsible for the collectivist steroetypes being made against their government, cultural background, race, ethnicity, religion, or otherwise.

I jump on the Nazi train because it's extremely important to realize, not all Germans during the 1930's-1940's were Nazi's directly responsible for the deaths of so many during that era. The vast majority were apathetic and rationalizing bystanders who felt the more "extreme" actions (at least the few that were not effectively hidden from them) could be excused away as a necessity during especially trying times for that nation in its history. Plus not only were those Jews obviously greedy and not one of their members of the superior Aryan race but since they didn't think, act, and live their lives like "normal" Germans, they didn't deserve the same level of consideration in the fashion in which they were treated, at least that's what their government convinced them to believe. Sounds familiar to me, it's exactly what has happened with our country over the last decade.

If you wish to continue to disagree there is very little I can do to force you to change, but I will be disappointed because I have always felt you not to be among the particularly close-minded who so readily jump to assumptions about individuals who they know absolutely nothing about other than whom they may or may not be associated with.

I figured it was only a matter of time before someone pulled the Nazi card on me....ironic, considering that I actually have some Hebrew heritage in my bloodline it turns out.

AJ, while I appreciate your candor, I think of it this way: Terrorists prefer to resort to violence instead of discussion. They value bullets and bombs over brains, and this is evident in their actions. Those speak louder than any words ever will or can. While yes, I am very tolerant of most of the planet's population, I cannot and will not tolerate these people. Until they change their primary method of doing business, I will still continue to view them as the sub-human barbarians that they are behaving like. If the shoe fit....

Banned
01-28-2012, 01:16 AM
I figured it was only a matter of time before someone pulled the Nazi card on me....ironic, considering that I actually have some Hebrew heritage in my bloodline it turns out.

But do you understand his point - on how similar 1930s-40s German rhetoric is strikingly similiar to what we're being told today?


AJ, while I appreciate your candor, I think of it this way: Terrorists prefer to resort to violence instead of discussion.

Has discussion worked for them? Could they have "discussed" us out of Iraq?


They value bullets and bombs over brains, and this is evident in their actions.

How do you figure? Maybe the dead terrorists did. But the terrorists who survived overwhelming American firepower, numbers, and training obviously value brains.


Those speak louder than any words ever will or can.

Hey, maybe that's what makes violence so damn effective!


While yes, I am very tolerant of most of the planet's population, I cannot and will not tolerate these people. Until they change their primary method of doing business, I will still continue to view them as the sub-human barbarians that they are behaving like. If the shoe fit....

If the shoe fits... wear it. Our own country matches all of the problems you just described!

AJBIGJ
01-28-2012, 03:15 AM
If the shoe fits... wear it. Our own country matches all of the problems you just described!

+1 again, after this I don't even feel the need to respond any further!

MACHINE666
01-28-2012, 01:20 PM
But do you understand his point - on how similar 1930s-40s German rhetoric is strikingly similiar to what we're being told today?



Has discussion worked for them? Could they have "discussed" us out of Iraq?



How do you figure? Maybe the dead terrorists did. But the terrorists who survived overwhelming American firepower, numbers, and training obviously value brains.



Hey, maybe that's what makes violence so damn effective!



If the shoe fits... wear it. Our own country matches all of the problems you just described!

I will give you half-credit on that one, but only because we conducted an illegal war in Iraq in my opinion...however....

Resorting to violence has not been our traditional method of protocol...look at the way we interact with formal nations who wish to engage in dialogue. And we haven't singed the nose hairs of the North Koreans yet with our nukes..While we may be giving Al Quaida hell in Afghanistan, we're still pretty tame in comparison. I think we should also treat the drug lords who flood our streets with drugs like cocaine, heroin, and meth as terrorists too, but that's an entirely different topic all together....

Pullinteeth
10-23-2013, 02:04 PM
Apparently Gen Amos doesn't support the peeing Marines... According to the convening authority (Lt Gen Waldhauser), he was relieved when he couldn't promise that all linked to the scandal would be tossed out of the Corps.

http://www.militarytimes.com/article/20131022/NEWS/310220033/Former-Marine-attorneys-call-congressional-inquiry-into-actions-commandant

4CECMC
10-23-2013, 02:09 PM
Lynch is far from an expert on this matter!