US Soldiers Pose With Dead Civilian Corpses

Bolded statements are strawmen.

GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Anyway, I want a link or proof that these soldiers are being charged.

Five of the soldiers are on trial for pre-meditated murder, after they staged killings to make it look like they were defending themselves from Taliban attacks.

Other charges include the mutilation of corpses, the possession of images of human casualties and drug abuse.

All of the soldiers have denied the charges. They face the death penalty or life in prison if convicted.

GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Intolerable is a relative term since most news stories today fall into that catagory. I know that it seems that Anonymous is rage hating on Obama but that is not really the issue. The issue is the fact the Obama is by far one of the worst presidents in U.S. history. That is due to his policies and actions, but that is for another discussion.

As for me, I am not a republican, I am a constitutionalist. Believe me when I say that I do not agree with republicans any more than I do democrats. Both parties makes asses out of themselves. You are right that I do understand what I am saying. I have spent a considerable amount of my adult life studying history, government (both domestic and foreign affairs) and also military (something I was once part of). I have a greater understanding than most when it comes to that stuff. Also, I dont like what I see comming on the horizon.

Having been in the military I can say this, when it comes to a soldiers actions, the responsibility falls up the chain of command. That chain has the president right at the top. That is what makes it his fault as he is the one who ultimately has to deal with it.

That's just idiotic. The people at fault would be the direct command, it's no better than saying the Muslim who went crazy and shot up the base is Obama's fault. Of course the entire nation his is responsibility, so it's an unrealistic criticism. I don't know about you, but in boot camp, I wasn't taught to do what they did. They were given the proper procedures, spoonfed morality. These people grew a prejudice, which is only natural for any human being in combat.

Obama has no correlation towards this action, strategists, generals, what have you have that responsibility. A soldier who commits treason for even disobeying orders are the ones who shoulder that responsibility, not their direct, let alone indirect chain of command.

Bolded statements are strawmen.

Anyway, I want a link or proof that these soldiers are being charged.
Although I never said "Obama ordered torture" Bush on the record claimed he did.
And expecting someone to do their job is not unreasonable. If he cant handle it, then get someone that can in office.

Ive never spoken to someone so ignorant in my life. You're blaming Obama for soldiers actions which he did nothing to foreshadow. I assure you not even you could keep that type of tight nit control. Maybe lets hear some suggestions on how to keep such events too occurring? What would you as president would do so that you responsibly did everything in your power to prevent?

And way to avoid my entire argument based on the fact you suddenly say "oh you're misinterpreting me therefore dont deserve a response". No, you simply can't communicate, nor comprehend my points.

Bolded point is where you need to go back too

basilmarket.

That's just idiotic. The people at fault would be the direct command, it's no better than saying the Muslim who went crazy and shot up the base is Obama's fault. Of course the entire nation his is responsibility, so it's an unrealistic criticism. I don't know about you, but in boot camp, I wasn't taught to do what they did. They were given the proper procedures, spoonfed morality. These people grew a prejudice, which is only natural for any human being in combat.

Obama has no correlation towards this action, strategists, generals, what have you have that responsibility. A soldier who commits treason for even disobeying orders are the ones who shoulder that responsibility, not their direct, let alone indirect chain of command.

I have to disagree with you here - the responsibility is indeed Obama's, in addition to everyone else in the chain of command. What that means is that they have to review steps taken to prevent events like this one, and see if they did everything in their power to prevent such an occurance. If they did, there is no blame for the chain of command, including Obama, except those that knew of the problem and did not correct it. If they did not, they will implement new safeguards against such events in the future. That's as far as Obama's responsibility extends, provided he was unaware of this happening.

Intolerable is a relative term since most news stories today fall into that catagory. I know that it seems that Anonymous is rage hating on Obama but that is not really the issue. The issue is the fact the Obama is by far one of the worst presidents in U.S. history. That is due to his policies and actions, but that is for another discussion.

As for me, I am not a republican, I am a constitutionalist. Believe me when I say that I do not agree with republicans any more than I do democrats. Both parties makes asses out of themselves. You are right that I do understand what I am saying. I have spent a considerable amount of my adult life studying history, government (both domestic and foreign affairs) and also military (something I was once part of). I have a greater understanding than most when it comes to that stuff. Also, I dont like what I see comming on the horizon.

Having been in the military I can say this, when it comes to a soldiers actions, the responsibility falls up the chain of command. That chain has the president right at the top. That is what makes it his fault as he is the one who ultimately has to deal with it.

GODDAMMIT HOW THE HELL CAN YOU STUDY US HISTORY FOR MOST OF YOUR ADULT LIFE AND STILL THINK OBAMA IS ONE OF THE WORST PRESIDENTS EVER?

List I can think of at top of my head

Buchanan
Hoover
Nixon
Tyler
Johnson
Harding

Anyway, I want a link or proof that these soldiers are being charged.
And expecting someone to do their job is not unreasonable. If he cant handle it, then get someone that can in office.

1) You and I know that it's impossible to find said article this moment....oh wait, is it in the OP?
2) Great, I'd like to see someone who can stop those pimentos that you've never seen before in your entire life from mutilating those civilians on the opposite side of the world and you hardly have any (if none) information about what's going to happen.

How about Andrew "Trail of Tears" Jackson?

That's it. I'm staying the pineapple away from current events from now on. Kanevaldier is mildly tolerable, since he's a far right republican. But Moose is just a cynic to the nth degree, to the point where I shall openly accuse him of being an anarchist. Seriously, if Obama's responsible for the actions of all his soldiers, then he's responsible for Wikileaks. All praise him!

I have to disagree with you here - the responsibility is indeed Obama's, in addition to everyone else in the chain of command. What that means is that they have to review steps taken to prevent events like this one, and see if they did everything in their power to prevent such an occurance. If they did, there is no blame for the chain of command, including Obama, except those that knew of the problem and did not correct it. If they did not, they will implement new safeguards against such events in the future. That's as far as Obama's responsibility extends, provided he was unaware of this happening.

It's their responsibility too respond to the actions accordingly, but I'm interpreting this as (the posts previously, not yours) "It's obama's irresponsibility that led to this event".

That's it. I'm staying the pineapple away from current events from now on. Kanevaldier is mildly tolerable, since he's a far right republican. But Moose is just a cynic to the nth degree, to the point where I shall openly accuse him of being an anarchist. Seriously, if Obama's responsible for the actions of all his soldiers, then he's responsible for Wikileaks. All praise him!

Responsibility =/= blame. Yes, he is responsible for the soldiers under his command, including any that are leaking classified information. He is not to blame for that happening, provided that he had no knowledge of it occurring beforehand and had done everything possible to prevent it.

It's their responsibility too respond to the actions accordingly, but I'm interpreting this as (the posts previously, not yours) "It's obama's irresponsibility that led to this event".

I know. I'm just trying to keep the concept of military responsibility for the actions of subordinates clear, since people keep confusing it.

Although I never said "Obama ordered torture." Bush on the record claimed he himself did - meaning Bush is at fault in his own case.
And expecting someone to do their job is not unreasonable. If he cant handle it, then get someone that can in office.

Are you stupid or what? You are saying these two points:

-Obama is faulty for not controlling each of the soldiers, even though they are being punished.
-Bush just ordered murdering, torture, and countless crap, but no big deal.

Look. Stop being a tool.

Responsibility =/= blame. Yes, he is responsible for the soldiers under his command, including any that are leaking classified information. He is not to blame for that happening, provided that he had no knowledge of it occurring beforehand and had done everything possible to prevent it.

I'm glad someone is seeing what I see. lol

I'm glad someone is seeing what I see. lol

[color="#cc8899"]
< Active duty US Navy E5. I've had some training in military leadership, lol.
Pic is a few months old
[/COLOR]

[color="#cc8899"]
< Active duty US Navy E5. I've had some training in military leadership, lol.
Pic is a few months old
[/COLOR]

Yeah both my grandpa and dad are retired Master sgt's lol

Let's put Moose's view in perspective:

Someone on Southperry got in a fierce argument with someone else on southperry. When one lost the argument, they tracked down the other person and killed them. This is now Eosian's fault, as he should have kept close track of all 7,402 members to prevent this. He is an unfit administrator and should step down.


There are absolutely no flaws in this logic.

Let's put Moose's view in perspective:

Someone on Southperry got in a fierce argument with someone else on southperry. When one lost the argument, they tracked down the other person and killed them. This is now Eosian's fault, as he should have kept close track of all 7,402 members to prevent this. He is an unfit administrator and should step down.There are absolutely no flaws in this logic.

This is essentially how the military is held in regard as MasPan has cited. Although stepping down has not been called for by anyone, at least that I recall, it is generally the cause for negative press on the government, specifically the President, for not controlling his charge as Commander In Chief. Not to mention the hundreds of staff members underneath Obama which will take the fall for him, and most likely be fired. He may not be the greatest President, but he does understand what must be done.

Let's put Moose's view in perspective:

Someone on Southperry got in a fierce argument with someone else on southperry. When one lost the argument, they tracked down the other person and killed them. This is now Eosian's fault, as he should have kept close track of all 7,402 members to prevent this. He is an unfit administrator and should step down.


There are absolutely no flaws in this logic.

LOL. Thats an extremely awful way to put it. The discussion is based on military chain of command and the resposibility of said command. Southperry does not fit this situation nor would anything else other than government/military.

@MasPan.....you are exactly right. You said what I was trying to say, just worded better.

@Corn....As I stated, Obama is one of the worst presidents in our history. I didnt say he was the worst. However, of the presidents you listed, all of them were able to speak without a teleprompter and none of them had economic issues and debt issues to the degree that we face under the Obama administration. To be honest, Lyndon Johnson would be at the top of my list for worst president. However, Obama certainly would fall into the top 5 on my list.

That's it. I'm staying the pineapple away from current events from now on. Kanevaldier is mildly tolerable, since he's a far right republican. But Moose is just a cynic to the nth degree, to the point where I shall openly accuse him of being an anarchist. Seriously, if Obama's responsible for the actions of all his soldiers, then he's responsible for Wikileaks. All praise him!

He'll just call you out on the strawman!

Though unfortunately, you either control power, or let it control you. It's not even a path with a line in the middle; It's a cliff, with gravity pulling your pants down.

And just so I don't get too lost:
- Responsibility: Obama has to clean this up, has to stand on the front to accept criticism (however absurd), and has to live the shame generalized to the level of the country he runs. (e.g: "the US is a bunch of murderers" + "Obama runs the US").

- Blame: JEWS OBAMA DID IT!

Let's put Moose's view in perspective:

Someone on Southperry got in a fierce argument with someone else on southperry. When one lost the argument, they tracked down the other person and killed them. This is now Eosian's fault, as he should have kept close track of all 7,402 members to prevent this. He is an unfit administrator and should step down.


There are absolutely no flaws in this logic.

There is no law that binds us to Eosian, and no law declares Eosian is responsible for actions we take outside of this site (although he might be responsible to moniter some of the content we post and make sure that we do not perform illegal activities on the site, like rom sharing).
Obama on the otherhand is bound by law to be responsible for our troops.

@above: He didnt make a strawman. At worse just an inaccurate insult as I am not an anarchist. I just believe the government should follow its own laws.

LOL. Thats an extremely awful way to put it. The discussion is based on military chain of command and the resposibility of said command. Southperry does not fit this situation nor would anything else other than government/military.

Businesses are the pinnacle of chains of command, and people who think a government is not essentially a business are stupid.

There is no law that binds us to Eosian, and no law declares Eosian is responsible for actions we take outside of this site (although he might be responsible to moniter some of the content we post and make sure that we do not perform illegal activities on the site, like rom sharing).
Obama on the otherhand is bound by law to be responsible for our troops.

Nice strawman, dude.

I think that a crucial factor towards combating foreign terrorism is for the United States to build up strong public relations with other countries, especially the country it is currently occupying. Given the fact that anyone could become an insurgent at any given time and a number or anti-western forces could provide arms to disgruntled denizens, I am curious how this will affect military strategy in Afghanistan. The article noted that many parties are bunkering down and are preparing for the worst. With low approval ratings from citizens back at home, perhaps soldiers view themselves more are mercenaries and less as patriots. Thereby leading to rogue actions that ultimately hurt American diplomacy and foreign relations to the world at large.

Nice strawman, dude.

I think you may need to understand what a strawman is.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:


Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.

Examples of Straw Man

Prof. Jones: "The university just cut our yearly budget by $10,000."
Prof. Smith: "What are we going to do?"
Prof. Brown: "I think we should eliminate one of the teaching assistant positions. That would take care of it."
Prof. Jones: "We could reduce our scheduled raises instead."
Prof. Brown: " I can't understand why you want to bleed us dry like that, Jones."

"Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I disagree entirely. I can't understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that."

Bill and Jill are arguing about cleaning out their closets:
Jill: "We should clean out the closets. They are getting a bit messy."
Bill: "Why, we just went through those closets last year. Do we have to clean them out everyday?"
Jill: "I never said anything about cleaning them out every day. You just want too keep all your junk forever, which is just ridiculous."

All I did was explain why her "interpretation" of my logic was false and did not apply to the situation at hand. That is not a strawman.