I don't think thats a word. And thats not quite the same, but I get your point.

But it does seem to me that some seek to portray this as justified. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Agreed.

Maybe amplification of this point will help you understand where some of us are coming from. To us, war is barbarism.

"fighting is crude and uncivilized especially if the weapons are efficient"

--Margaret Meade (sociologist in her own right and wife of George Herber Meade, one of the founders of social-psych)

One could say that explaining the circumstances surrounding such behavior is justifying it.

But if you are going to operate with that definition then asking someone to explain it to you is just baiting someone for an argument.

My understanding of justification, however, is that something is excusable. That is vastly different than pointing out the underlying, contextual reasons for one's actions.

We are going to have to agree to disagree because I believe that attempting to understand one's behavior does not at all imply acceptance that the behavior is appropriate.

It was a rhetorical question. I KNOW what kind of people behave that way. But thanks for your explanation anyway. I'm much more enlightened now.

Great, there you have it. Straight from the OP's mouth. You were baiting people who were going to make an attempt at answering your question since you already know the answer--that's pretty shitty.

Everyone who wasted their time trying to answer your rhetorical question are actually the ones who are more enlightened.

:rolleyes:

I thought I presented it pretty clearly, but I guess I'll try again: Why does it matter if the four people were soldiers, or civilians?

Our soldiers, as well as those of the opposition, should be able to expect that their corpses not be set on fire and mutilated.

I suggest re-reading the thread -- in particular, posts by SF. Superbelt seems to be cooking up conspiracy theories here as well. Clearly the four victims were up to no good with those trucks of food.

123dsa is the only person on this thread that seemed to think that this was worse of a crime because the victims were civilians. I think it would be just as horrible if the victims were enlisted men and women. I don't see any need to cloud the issue by trying to re-define "civilian."

Would you care if the US shot an Iraqi, burned his corpse, and then dragged it behind a car? For some reason, I think you would be outraged.

Please feel free to back this up with some credible reports of the US mutilating the corpses of Iraqis.

Now who is putting words into other peoples' mouths? I think that the most advanced military in the world can deal with this in a way other than carpet-bombing the town. :hmm:

Christ, everything has to be so difficult with these people doesn't it?

I'd have liked to see a few cruise missles pumped into that crowd myself.

Brilliant, four American mercenaries are killed in a horrible way, so lets kill a whole town full of innocent civilians because there's some of the murderers in the town who will die with them...

Now, do you see, why the Iraqi people do not want you there?

why don't you look at seretogis' thread above sf

are just trying to pick a fight here your ajure st restating the same thing that everyone else is so stop it

i personally think your crazy i think you have gone so far left that the only way to relate your positions to the right is to find a person who is whole hardilly behind a strict monarchy i mean come the fun of the discusion is in the give and the take

we are not wanted there because they remeber the oppresive days of british rule for the most part not because we are in this case attacking radicals that are violating there own religios beliefs

I said
I came into this thread concerned that some were taking this event too extreme. I haven't justified shit. I fully believe those who killed these men need to be captured and prosecuted if possible, killed if necessary.
I take offense to those who automatically want to raze this city to the ground, including the Marine commander who will be in charge of such an action.
We may end up hurt/kill a lot of people who don't deserve it.

I am not pushing conspiracy theories. We don't know what happened. All we know is american mercenaires died. The official story that they died protecting a food convoy doesn't jive with common sense.

Why are we paying so much attention to these 4 men? Why do their deaths deserve a leveling of an entire city? They came to Iraq for money, or soldiers, many of whom were ordered to come from their national guard duties, are dying every day. We lost over 51 actual soldiers this month. Where is the holy retribution for them?

I also think it's funny how our government can pay 1000 dollars a day or more (up to around 2500 for the really expensive ones) for a merc, but our soldiers who make around 8 or 9k a YEAR get their benefits slashed by our government, and WE are the ones being accused of not supporting our troops and being anti-american.

The American and British soldiers are not wanted there because they keep killing Iraqi people, stealing Iraq's natural oil reserves, and they have removed the Iraqi political structure and replaced it with colonial rule.

It isnt just radicals or Al Qieda trying to drive America out of Iraq as you seem to want to believe, the Iraqi people all hate America now, far more than they ever used to even when Hussain was there.

Look at the reaction on this board to the murder of the American mercenaries... people here say and I can only assume that they honestly want, for a town to be massacred by missile or troops because 4 American's died horribly - they want to bomb these women, children, elderly people (and men, and some radicals, and some black marketers, and some crooks, and some killers) and destroy them all because of the death of just 4 American's.

This is not just the voice of isolated people, this is the voice of a whole part of America, and I have to tell you that many of the troops there would also like to see this town destroyed by a cruise missile, and all the women and children and men their destroyed.

Now, you asked me not to repeat myself but I feel I must, do you understand why they do not want you there?

Superbelt,
You do raise a good point, and erasing Fallujah would be absolutely grossly disproportionate if this is the only problem that American troops or contractors had had with Fallujah since the "end of major hostilities". It just seems to me that this is merely the most despicable of a constant flow of objectionable events stemming from that town. I realize it is hardly scientific, but it seems that every fifth or sixth killing of an American occurrs in or around there. With that as the context, I'm not sure that destroying the town would still be a disproportionate response. I am not - cannot - say it is the right thing to do, but it sure feels right.

Think about what you just said. That you know in your head its wrong, but in your heart it feels right to massacre a town and kill every civilian there.

Why, why, do we have this lack of understanding of why the Iraqi people do not want the American's, or the British, there?

How many more Iraqi's, what ratio would you guess at, how many more Iraqi's have been killed by the UK/US forces than American's and Britains killed in Iraq? Do you really think the lives of Western people are worth more, that it is a greater crime to take them? I just cannot understand.

Like I said, I dont take any pleasure in watching these mercenaries killed but they should not have been there. The message is clear... America has achieved its objectives, Saddam has gone, the WMD's were never there, so get out, get out of Iraq and get out now.

Oh, unless the reason Bush and Blair are there never was to topple Hussain and look for WMD... if the reason was oil... I guess THAT would make sense while we are still there.

And if Israel were located exactly where Japan is currently, it would be North Korea at war, not Iraq.

It's all about demographics I'd say.

I couldn't agree more. Nobody should try to justify or rationalize it. Inhuman only begins to describe it.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...0.html?cnn=yes
This is still not meant to diminish the deaths of these men, but I just think it is important to repeat, that there may have been extenuating circumstances. And is reason for pause before you level a city.

Alternatively, this could be the work of a specific terrorist entity, not people who actually live in Falluja, who want to see america use it's "overwhelming force" so that they have some extreme vid-bytes to gain new recruits and work the muslim world into a vengeful lather after seeing how we treat that town.
And I do think things can go quickly down-hill for us in Iraq if we don't engage this Falluja situation tactfully. Overwhelming Force seems to be lacking in in that tact.

It's a pretty good tactic. Sacrifice some of their "bretheren" to force martyr status on them. Then reap the benefits of average Iraqi support.

just more of my .02

Ladies and Gentlemen, Let us try and stick to the topic of the thread and stop these stupid fights amongst one another. This thread is about the deaths of 4 Americans in Fallujah, lets discuss that.

"War is Hell"

Yes it is unfortunate that people die in warfare, but it is also reality.
Yes it was an immoral way to treat the bodies of the dead, but it is warfare.
Yes we all have the right to be upset, and feel anger towards the perpetrators of such a henious act.
Yes they have the right to be upset, and feel anger towards the perpetrators of what they percieve as a henious act(occupation of homeland).

No, this war is not over, and there has been no "end to major hostilities", as proclaimed by the administration.

No, getting pissed and leveling a city of mostly innocent people will not prevent this from happening again.

No, Security forces in Iraq are not immune to attack, and are well aware of this, they are not civilians in any way as far as the Iraqis are concerned.

No, most Iraqis do not support the mutilation of corpses, but are likely getting less tolerant of a brutal occupation.

In short, this is a war. People will die. It will never be pretty, and anyone who didn't see this sort of thing coming probably has a limited understanding of the realities in Iraq.

We all have a limited understanding of the realities in Iraq.

Hi!

This certainly has stirred up some emotions, hasn't it?

Lets look at some facts:

1. Iraqis, on the whole, are not happy about having their country invaded and taken in 3 weeks, regardless of the reasons.

2. Americans, and their coalition allies, are going to be targets as long as we are there in an occupying role.

3. While killing invaders may be justified, what the crowd did to those 4 people can never be justified, be it religiously, moraly, philosophicaly, or otherwise. It was a disgrace, plain and simple.

4. The action does not justify the destruction of the whole town, nor was that ever threatened by any coalition official. It is cause for a re-evaluation of our tactics and methods, especially in the Sunni Triangle area. The Marines made a big deal about crapping on the Armys "heavy handed tactics" in Fallujah. My guess is that they are now having second thoughts.

5. Pulling out of Iraq cold turkey right now would have disasterous results for Iraq, the region, and the US. The last thing anybody needs is another radical muslim state up in arms against the west.

debaser,

i agree with most of what you said, though i'm not sure all the things listed were facts and not your own analysis.

i especially take exception to the first point.

ABC News/Oxford Research just conducted a scientific poll of Iraqis. The results are very interesting. I think everyone who is interested in these events should take a look at it.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world...ll_040314.html

Overall, 56% of Iraqis feel they are better off now than before the war. 19% feel they are worse, the balance feel they are about the same.

I realize they didn't ask directly ask if they are happy about the invasion, but I feel there is enough supporting evidence provided by this poll to make a convincing argument contrary to your assumption.

I have serious doubts about any polling being done unless the polling company can address my concerns that most people who are angry at america, are against our occupation or are actively working against it would shy away from talking to the pollsters or give false answers (fearing the polling is a trap).
ABC doesn't seem to address that issue to me.

The numbers ABC gives are the best case scenario. The true numbers are definetly lower. The only question is by how much.

The last thing I would want to see is a cruise missle wasted on these worthless excuses for a life.

Lets waste one of these on them!!!!


http://www.netoriginals.com/uss/imag...urces/bomb.jpg

Hell yeah! Let's BRING IT ON! Again. You sandies think it was bad when your kids got the most extreme cases of hydroencephalitis most people will ever see LAST time we decided to fuck with you? (thank you depleted uranium shells)
Wait till you see what happens after we give reconmike "the button"

_______
recon, that was disgusting of you. Go to the link. How could you joke about dropping a nuke on anyone again, unless under the most. dire. circumstances. Knowing this is in store for the unlucky survivors offspring?
The pictures are there, I won't put them directly on this page because I know they would get pulled by the mods, for how horrific they are, and I would probrably get a warning or banning for it.

How about a warning to everyone against trolling?

Locked.