evil_gop_liars Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 let's say terrorists walk in yer house.....which at somepoint might happen......are you gonna be gentle? It depends are they there to commit a crime or wage war.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 This entire situation makes my stomach turn. Some of my best friends from the military are SEALS and if some of these statements were made publicly in the SEAL bar i frequent, you'd have a not so good day. These liberal assed JAG attorney's make me sick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 So basically, the primary reason that there are terrorists is to make money? They have no real goal or reason behind what they do--they just need to 'get funded?' Please note--I'm not asking sarcastically but that's what you seem to be implying and I want to make sure that I understand you. no, but they need support and funding to survive. if there is no war to fight, what do they have left? live in peace? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuke'em ttg Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 It depends are they there to commit a crime or wage war.... i'm not askin love it or leave it simple as that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 no, but they need support and funding to survive. if there is no war to fight, what do they have left? live in peace? So if I'm understanding correctly, terrorism is essentially the way they choose to survive. They create enemies to garner funding and this in turn, 'pays the bills.' It's not that terrorists have an actual reason to wage terrorism, it's that they need money to survive and terrorism is their method for doing so. Do I understand your position or am I still missing it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Where did you read that? Is a "glance over" considered assault these days? First off, the prisoner said he was assaulted by his captors. To me this charge meant while he was in custody. Now, whether this charge is accurate or not is something that will be investigated. Second, was the SEAL who said he glanced at the prisoner one of those accused? Also, could the prisoner have been assaulted at some point after the SEAL said he saw nothing wrong with the prisoner? This is how I read it. At some point the prisoner was fine, but that doesn't mean he wasn't also assaulted at some point. I'm not defending the piece of trash. I'm pointing out that I hope our conduct is an example to those young impressionable muslim youth in a good way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuke'em ttg Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 You want to place a wager on that? No, of course not. I'm going to instead try to understand why he's doing what he's doing. please tell me CaP'N means yer ringin a bell right now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 (edited) So if I'm understanding correctly, terrorism is essentially the way they choose to survive. They create enemies to garner funding and this in turn, 'pays the bills.' It's not that terrorists have an actual reason to wage terrorism, it's that they need money to survive and terrorism is their method for doing so. Do I understand your position or am I still missing it? you got it. they have nothing else. jihad is their product. they aint going back to farming. believe me, i would love to test your theory out. lets leave and drill in the gulf and alaska. Edited November 25, 2009 by dmarc117 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evil_gop_liars Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 i'm not askin love it or leave it simple as that "you have to love your country like an adult loves somebody, not like a child loves its Mommy. And right-wing Republicans tend to love America like a child loves its Mommy, where everything Mommy does is okay. But adult love means you’re not in denial, and you want the loved one to be the best they can be." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 you got it. they have nothing else. jihad is their product. So they are just looking for money. If that's the case we can buy them all off. Boy did we ever spend our money poorly in Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 So they are just looking for money. If that's the case we can buy them all off. Boy did we ever spend our money poorly in Iraq. who said that? im saying they need money to fight and buy weapons, bombs, virgins, etc. stuff aint free, holmes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 we are the 'great satan' regardless of what we do over there. Isnt that almost a direct quote from Colonel Nathan Jessup?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 We may be the great Satan to the jihadists, but we don't need to make their recruitment easier by pushing the youth to embrace their radical ideology. And that point is huge. Just look at the demographics of the population in Iran for instance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 they would find some reason to keep the fight up. its how they thrive and get funded. sounds like a political tactic i have seen somewhere before?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 sounds like a political tactic i have seen somewhere before?? unions! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 no, but they need support and funding to survive. if there is no war to fight, what do they have left? live in peace? How about the hundreds of millions of dollars in illegal heroin money? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Seemly overlooked in this discussion is that all three of these guys were charged with making a false official statment and one of them was charged with impeding an investigation. So its a bit more than a "punch in the gut." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Where did you read that? Is a "glance over" considered assault these days? Sorry, I meant to say in my other post that the report says the guy appeared OK to a visitor to his cell, therefore he must have been assaulted after the actual capture and not during it. I didn't mean to imply it was the cell visitor who did it. My bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted November 26, 2009 Author Share Posted November 26, 2009 (edited) Apparently it is a silly expectation. Color me shocked. Not as bad as I thought though, to be honest. Edited November 26, 2009 by BeeR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Isn't it military personnel who are charging these Navy Seals? Are the military personnel who are bringing charges forward any less deserving of our respect than the Navy Seals who have been charged? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Isn't it military personnel who are charging these Navy Seals? Are the military personnel who are bringing charges forward any less deserving of our respect than the Navy Seals who have been charged? well duh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Seriously... is there a non-Fox link to this story? I'd like to read about it, but I suspect strongly that there is little if nothing to this story if only Fox is reporting it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Seriously... is there a non-Fox link to this story? I'd like to read about it, but I suspect strongly that there is little if nothing to this story if only Fox is reporting it. http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/11/navy...llujah_112509w/ http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/11/25/....seals.falluja/ http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/25/...in5773164.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 From Az's Navy Times link: McCabe is charged with one count each of assault of the detainee, dereliction of duty and making a false official statement, Silkman said. Keefe is charged with one count each of dereliction of duty and false official statement; Huertas is accused of dereliction of duty, making a false official statement and impeding an investigation, she said. The source said the charges stem not from the capture itself — which have a high potential for violence — but from later on, when Abed was under detention. “If they really wanted to [beat] him that was the time do it,” during the capture, the source said. “That’s why this is so ridiculous.” From Az's CNN link: Because the charges against Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe, Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe and Petty Officer Julio Heurtas are the military equivalent of misdemeanors, they will go before a special court-martial, which is for less serious offenses than those heard in a general court-martial. If found guilty, they could be sentenced to a maximum of a year in a military prison, demotion to the lowest Navy rank, a cut in pay and a bad conduct discharge. But if found innocent of all charges, they would be able to continue their careers with no record of the case in their personnel files I was arrested for MiP two days after getting back from Desert Storm. On top of the full civilian punishment, I was restricted to the ship for 60 days and had my pay cut for 90. A far worse punishment would be to leave them at Little Creek. Not sure what their is to be outraged about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddahj Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 it's all bulls++t Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.