US soldier opens fire on Afghan civilians (up to 16 dead)

«‹›12 »

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Gas Chamber > US soldier opens fire on Afghan civilians (up to 16 dead)

Fungah: Jul 2, 2003; Fungah! Foiled again!

Vladimir Putin posted:

I'm sorry, but Bin Laden has been attacking America for nearly a decade before 9/11 (beginning with the first WTC bombing), and that has been well established. Clinton initiated the opening salvos against Bin Laden, as he was a recognized threat before Bush ever bumbled into the presidency.

So in retaliation for a different Bin Laden attack the US kills thousands of Sudanese?

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 22, 2013 19:11

Samurai Sanders: Nov 4, 2003

DerpDerp posted:

Agreed, but are people that are meant to come to your country and shoot people really meant to be cultural ambassadors?
I'm not really trying to defend him or anything, but the argument seemed to be closer to 'lol, religion' than 'gently caress browns and gently caress any culture not mine (by the way I am a straight white protestant male)'.

I think they need to be, since they will be the only Americans many people ever see. And usually people who are already slanted against Americans, so it's doubly important that they be on good behavior, as much as is possible for a soldier anyway.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:03

Vladimir Putin: Mar 17, 2007; Pardon me sir, would you like to have some Polonium ?

HallelujahLee posted:

You know I am not one to really defend dictatorships as Afghanistan was during its communist years but man I look at Afghanistan today and Afghanistan in the 70's and it is such a massive difference. Afghanistan went from a modern country to a complete shithole stuck in the 1800's and this was supposedly considered a victory over communism or whatever.

There's a valid comparison to be made, but you are kind of simplifying decades of complex political situations into a simple comparison.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:04

DarkSol: May 18, 2006; Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines.

DerpDerp posted:

You're assuming that most people with those viewpoints have actually put much thought and research into them.

I sincerely doubt most people think about it beyond "I don't like dead babies, so I'm against abortion. I also don't like seeing $150 coming out of my paycheck in taxes. Rick Santorum says he's really against abortion, maybe I should vote for him!"

Yeah, and it loving terrifies me.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:05

az jan jananam: Sep 6, 2011; _{"Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I will meet you there."-Rumi}

HallelujahLee posted:

Afghanistan went from a modern country

Afghanistan most definitely was not a "modern country" in the 1970s.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:05

HallelujahLee: May 3, 2009

Vladimir Putin posted:

Wrong, Bin Laden was a fighter entirely for religious reasons. Native Afghan Mujahadeen were fighters who fought for their homeland but who happened to be religious. Of course there is a wide spectrum in that also, because there were major religious hardliners who later became leaders in the Taliban. But under the 'big tent' of the Mujahadeen label, there were a lot of people who were just fighting because they were resisting the USSR.

But there were also lots of people fighting for religious reasons why you keep placing the religious reason solely on Bin laden.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:06

Vladimir Putin: Mar 17, 2007; Pardon me sir, would you like to have some Polonium ?

Fungah posted:

So in retaliation for a different Bin Laden attack the US kills thousands of Sudanese?

Hey Clinton had to do something about all the heat he was taking from the Lewinsky scandal.

It's also hilarious that Newt Gingrich is now running for president.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:06

Vladimir Putin: Mar 17, 2007; Pardon me sir, would you like to have some Polonium ?

HallelujahLee posted:

But there were also lots of people fighting for religious reasons why you keep placing the religious reason solely on Bin laden.

I didn't. You're failing to recognize the complex relationship between foreign fighters in Afghanistan motivated by purely religious reasons, and natives of a country who are caught up in a national resistance movement.

Edit: Also you should do more reading on the era and the groups involved. It's highly interesting

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:07

HallelujahLee: May 3, 2009

az jan jananam posted:

Afghanistan most definitely was not a "modern country" in the 1970s.

So what was it then?

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:07

DarkSol: May 18, 2006; Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines.

Vladimir Putin posted:

Hey Clinton had to do something about all the heat he was taking from the Lewinsky scandal.

It's also hilarious that Newt Gingrich is now running for president.

You're really claiming that Clinton went after Bin Laden in the late '90s only because he got caught schtupping Monica?

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:09

az jan jananam: Sep 6, 2011; _{"Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I will meet you there."-Rumi}

HallelujahLee posted:

So what was it then?

Backwards, poverty-ridden, and mostly ungoverned.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:10

Vladimir Putin: Mar 17, 2007; Pardon me sir, would you like to have some Polonium ?

DarkSol posted:

You're really claiming that Clinton went after Bin Laden in the late '90s only because he got caught schtupping Monica?

No I'm not, I'm only joking.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:10

TPMcCarthiera: Jul 28, 2011; by T. Mascis

HallelujahLee posted:

So what was it then?

Well, what is a watermelon?

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:10

FreudianSlippers: Apr 12, 2010; Justified and Ancient.

az jan jananam posted:

Backwards, poverty-ridden, and mostly ungoverned.

Rural areas perhaps but the cities were for the most part as modern as most 20th century cities.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:12

HallelujahLee: May 3, 2009

Vladimir Putin posted:

I didn't. You're failing to recognize the complex relationship between foreign fighters in Afghanistan motivated by purely religious reasons, and natives of a country who are caught up in a national resistance movement.

Edit: Also you should do more reading on the era and the groups involved. It's highly interesting .

No I know the complex relationship exists it just seemed to me that you were placing the religious stance solely on Bin Laden. My reading list is rather long at the moment but ill probably pick up some books on the conflict in the future.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:13

HallelujahLee: May 3, 2009

az jan jananam posted:

Backwards, poverty-ridden, and mostly ungoverned.

In your opinion which Afghanistan was better then 1970s or the current. Because from what ive read Communist Afghanistan at least in the major cities was somewhat modern.

Quick edit: Also what I mean by modern wasent first world country or whatever just a decent country that was at least stable and livable.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:16

Amused to Death: Aug 10, 2009; google "The Night Witches", and prepare for

az jan jananam posted:

Backwards, poverty-ridden, and mostly ungoverned.

Afghanistan might not have been a full scale industrialized nation, but they were decently stable and successful.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articl..._in_afghanistan

This is Kabul(well, mostly, it has pictures from elsewhere as well), playgrounds, movie theaters, record stores, working public transportation, vaccine research centers, textile mills, hell girls in skirts and heels. Not the first world or anything but functioning and decently modern for its time.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:16

Cjones: Jul 4, 2008; Democracia Socrates, MD

Vladimir Putin posted:

Hey Clinton had to do something about all the heat he was taking from the Lewinsky scandal.

I thought Kosovo was Clinton's "wag the dog"

Also, you guys are posting pictures of neighborhoods in Kabul in the sixties. The rest of the country had no infrastructure whatsoever, and in the latter half of the 70s basically everything in Kabul was destroyed.

edit: also, the PDPA (Commies) didn't take over until '78

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:16

az jan jananam: Sep 6, 2011; _{"Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I will meet you there."-Rumi}

Amused to Death posted:

This is Kabul(well, mostly, it has pictures from elsewhere as well), playgrounds, movie theaters, record stores, working public transportation, vaccine research centers, textile mills, hell girls in skirts and heels. Not the first world or anything but functioning and decently modern for its time.

Having a capital city with functioning modern infrastructure is the least impressive thing a state can do considering how corruption tends to centralize money around specific economic centers in places like Afghanistan (a phenomenon that is happening today); you could go to Cairo in the 1940s and see the same and get the impression that a thriving middle class existed despite the fact that 90% of the population was illiterate and lived in desperate poverty.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:20

matrocious: Feb 6, 2011

Clinton had some stuff in Sudan bombed just as Monica-gate was breaking. Middle of the night thing, iirc.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:24

Cjones: Jul 4, 2008; Democracia Socrates, MD

matrocious posted:

Clinton had some stuff in Sudan bombed just as Monica-gate was breaking. Middle of the night thing, iirc.

The Aspirin factory, yeah. I doubt that was "was the dog" though, he got a ton of poo poo over killing a bunch of Sudanese because they had no more medicine.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:26

OBi: Feb 27, 2005

President Kucinich posted:

Hope you get captured and gutted like the pig you aspire to be. This kind of thinking is why so many marines have been killed in the first place. It is when you practice this line of thinking in reality that leads to explosive rage from the populace you signed up to protect stemming from gross abuses of power.

Please stop talking because you are just making those in the military who do not join to make money shooting women in the back look bad. I feel bad for the other service members who have to put up with the consequences of your thoughts.

Look it's a military expert, here to tell us how war should be waged, because if he was in charge it would be just, clean, and bloodless

He said if it came down to a choice he'd always choose himself or his brothers every time, and you jumped to assuming he joined specifically for the purpose of murdering old women. You'd have to look pretty loving far to find a soldier of any type who doesn't think exactly the same way, and the fact that you so easily condemn him for his rational desire to protect those he loves first tells me you've never been in any military of any type.

Tentakulon posted:

Let's keep all in mind that the opposite is reality. On the world map, the US is easily the worst offender against freedom by a long stretch. I'm not saying this to piss people off, but just because it doesn't get mentioned often enough. You aren't the good guys, you're the empire.

The US has certainly made it's share of horrible mistakes, tragic blunders, and done it's share of outright villainy, but what empire has ever been better? Someone is always on top, they always use their position to their own advantage, and to my eyes the yoke of the US has been gentler than any before it (and gentler than China's is likely to be in the future). It may not be right, or nice, or good, but that's the way it is... Heck, the US did a pretty good job propping up Germany, Japan, and South Korea against the 'threat' of Communism, and they're all successful modernized countries now.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:27

BaconButts: Jan 26, 2011; It was worth ten dollars to everyone but me.

The aspirin factory gave him an erection and monica fell on it. Revenge is a dish served ice cold.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:28

Paper Jam Dipper: Jul 14, 2007; "Hey you want some cheese and crackers buddy?"

OBi posted:

The US has certainly made it's share of horrible mistakes, tragic blunders, and done it's share of outright villainy, but what empire has ever been better? Someone is always on top, they always use their position to their own advantage, and to my eyes the yoke of the US has been gentler than any before it (and gentler than China's is likely to be in the future). It may not be right, or nice, or good, but that's the way it is... Heck, the US did a pretty good job propping up Germany, Japan, and South Korea against the 'threat' of Communism, and they're all successful modernized countries now.

C'mon, we ain't Rowdy Roddy Piper or anything! I mean sure, we've approached levels of Paul Orndorff and on our worst day we're Jake Roberts, but not like Jake Roberts all of the time. When it comes to wrestling heels, we ain't so bad!"

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:32

Fungah: Jul 2, 2003; Fungah! Foiled again!

OBi posted:

Look it's a military expert, here to tell us how war should be waged, because if he was in charge it would be just, clean, and bloodless

He said if it came down to a choice he'd always choose himself or his brothers every time, and you jumped to assuming he joined specifically for the purpose of murdering old women. You'd have to look pretty loving far to find a soldier of any type who doesn't think exactly the same way, and the fact that you so easily condemn him for his rational desire to protect those he loves first tells me you've never been in any military of any type.

The US has certainly made it's share of horrible mistakes, tragic blunders, and done it's share of outright villainy, but what empire has ever been better? Someone is always on top, they always use their position to their own advantage, and to my eyes the yoke of the US has been gentler than any before it (and gentler than China's is likely to be in the future). It may not be right, or nice, or good, but that's the way it is... Heck, the US did a pretty good job propping up Germany, Japan, and South Korea against the 'threat' of Communism, and they're all successful modernized countries now.

Wow this post has it all. Starts off with a hearty "you weren't there, man", segues into a "everyone else was/would be worse" and ends with praise of the cold war.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:34

Cjones: Jul 4, 2008; Democracia Socrates, MD

OBi posted:

It may not be right, or nice, or good, but that's the way it is...

No, gently caress you Dad.

You're starting to sound like Rudyard Kipling.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:34

HallelujahLee: May 3, 2009

OBi posted:

The US has certainly made it's share of horrible mistakes, tragic blunders, and done it's share of outright villainy, but what empire has ever been better? Someone is always on top, they always use their position to their own advantage, and to my eyes the yoke of the US has been gentler than any before it (and gentler than China's is likely to be in the future). It may not be right, or nice, or good, but that's the way it is... Heck, the US did a pretty good job propping up Germany, Japan, and South Korea against the 'threat' of Communism, and they're all successful modernized countries now.

We have done awful things and continue to do so but at least we haven't reached British Empire levels but you can look forward to China being worse because hey we are not that bad!

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:37

DarkSol: May 18, 2006; Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines.

OBi posted:

He said if it came down to a choice he'd always choose himself or his brothers every time, and you jumped to assuming he joined specifically for the purpose of murdering old women. You'd have to look pretty loving far to find a soldier of any type who doesn't think exactly the same way, and the fact that you so easily condemn him for his rational desire to protect those he loves first tells me you've never been in any military of any type.

I've been in the military and I'm easily able to condemn him. You don't put "bros before hoes", to put it bluntly. You follow your orders, period. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

The US ratified Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions and all service members are beholden to it.

Art 75. Fundamental guarantees posted:

1. In so far as they are affected by a situation referred to in Article 1 of this Protocol, persons who are in the power of a Party to the conflict and who do not benefit from more favourable treatment under the Conventions or under this Protocol shall be treated humanely in all circumstances and shall enjoy, as a minimum, the protection provided by this Article without any adverse distinction based upon race, colour, sex, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or other status, or on any other similar criteria. Each Party shall respect the person, honour, convictions and religious practices of all such persons.

2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:
(a) violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:
(i) murder;
(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;
(iii) corporal punishment; and
(iv) mutilation;

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:40

NoneSuch: Jun 5, 2010; oh not this time.
your act of being the
goodguy is over

OBi posted:

Look it's a military expert, here to tell us how war should be waged, because if he was in charge it would be just, clean, and bloodless

He said if it came down to a choice he'd always choose himself or his brothers every time, and you jumped to assuming he joined specifically for the purpose of murdering old women. You'd have to look pretty loving far to find a soldier of any type who doesn't think exactly the same way, and the fact that you so easily condemn him for his rational desire to protect those he loves first tells me you've never been in any military of any type.

You're defending someone who said they'd shoot a shady looking person just incase. It's not a "Oh well, innocents die it can't be helped aslong as me and my buddies make it" You're supposed to be helping these loving people not murdering them because they could be the enemy. If you put your life before a civilians you aren't really fit to be a soldier.

And no, I'm not in the army so I don't get it.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:43

HallelujahLee: May 3, 2009

DarkSol posted:

I've been in the military and I'm easily able to condemn him. You don't put "bros before hoes", to put it bluntly. You follow your orders, period. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

The US ratified Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions and all service members are beholden to it.

Could you expand on this does the military have a system in place for soldiers who refuse immoral orders.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:46

Copley Depot: Jul 9, 2009; This space reserved for future text.

OBi posted:

Heck, the US did a pretty good job propping up Germany, Japan, and South Korea against the 'threat' of Communism, and they're all successful modernized countries now.

Oh, and Afghanistan. Don't forget that one!

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:46

FreudianSlippers: Apr 12, 2010; Justified and Ancient.

OBi posted:

The US has certainly made it's share of horrible mistakes, tragic blunders, and done it's share of outright villainy, but what empire has ever been better? Someone is always on top, they always use their position to their own advantage, and to my eyes the yoke of the US has been gentler than any before it (and gentler than China's is likely to be in the future). It may not be right, or nice, or good, but that's the way it is... Heck, the US did a pretty good job propping up Germany, Japan, and South Korea against the 'threat' of Communism, and they're all successful modernized countries now.

Manifest Destiny wasn't all that bad, I mean somebody else would have killed those millions of natives,Mexicans,Filipinos and other peoples that obviously couldn't govern themselves due to being so dark skinned and barbaric or given all that money and support to great leaders like Pinochet, Papa Doc, Baby Doc, Shah Pahlevi, Batista, Franco, Marcos,Banzer, Rabuka, Somoza, Somoza jr.,Videla, Cordova, Cerzo, Trujillo, Rios Mont etc. etc. if America hadn't.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:46

Ivor Biggun: Apr 30, 2003; A big "Fuck You!" from the Keyhole nebula

Vladimir Putin posted:

No you loving retard, the organization that financed, trained, conceived and planned it was based in Afghanistan where they operated with near impunity because the country was a poo poo hole. Jesus Christ, it doesn't matter where they were citizens. They all lived in different countries at various times, but what they all had in common was that they snuck into Afghanistan from their respective countries via Pakistan and were given training and resources to carry out the plot.

How can it be loving 2012 and people still not understand this? Uhhh huhuh it's all about Saudi Arabia duh duh duh. gently caress, Bin Laden was even from Saudi Arabia. But guess what, he doesn't live there anymore. SO WHY THE gently caress WOULD YOU INVADE SAUDI ARABIA.

What is the matter with you people?

I don't want people to think I'm trolling someone who's taken time to inform themselves but my post was intended to be a dumb counterpoint to people who say that the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan are because "they attacked us first". It didn't really contribute anything to the thread so I apologise for annoying you with it.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:46

Cjones: Jul 4, 2008; Democracia Socrates, MD

HallelujahLee posted:

Could you expand on this does the military have a system in place for soldiers who refuse immoral orders.

The US military?

The court martial system

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:46

Tentakulon: Apr 12, 2010; BEHOLD THE REMAINS OF ANCIENT AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT! IF ONLY GBS WOULD LISTEN TO ME. MY TALK COULD SAVE THE WORLD FROM THE SAME FATE! ALSO BOOK YOUR SEATS NOW FOR PEAK OIL TO HIT THIS SUMMER!

OBi posted:

The US has certainly made it's share of horrible mistakes, tragic blunders, and done it's share of outright villainy, but what empire has ever been better? Someone is always on top, they always use their position to their own advantage, and to my eyes the yoke of the US has been gentler than any before it (and gentler than China's is likely to be in the future). It may not be right, or nice, or good, but that's the way it is... Heck, the US did a pretty good job propping up Germany, Japan, and South Korea against the 'threat' of Communism, and they're all successful modernized countries now.

You're right in that there's always a top dog. The yoke of the American Empire being gentler than anything sounds like a bad joke to me, though, and I'd like to hear on what you base the assumption that a Chinese rule would be more brutal.
I'd say the US is the worst empire we ever had because I include the cultural and economic effects of it aswell. Coca-Cola, Wall Street, Monsanto, the entire scheme of casino capitalism and corporatism is essentially an American thing, the backbone of the empire, so to say.

Japan, South Korea, and Germany (where I'm from) can also be described as Americanized countries. We've had much of our identity blurred through the de-Nazification and had it replaced with Disney and Elvis, and similar plastering-over of original cultural traits by American cultural exports can be seen elsewhere. The economic "stability" the Empire provides is really just a hooking into globalized trade, which is about to tank and not recover. And then what?
Nah, I'm not convinced. Down with the empire.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:47

Amused to Death: Aug 10, 2009; google "The Night Witches", and prepare for

az jan jananam posted:

Having a capital city with functioning modern infrastructure is the least impressive thing a state can do considering how corruption tends to centralize money around specific economic centers in places like Afghanistan (a phenomenon that is happening today); you could go to Cairo in the 1940s and see the same and get the impression that a thriving middle class existed despite the fact that 90% of the population was illiterate and lived in desperate poverty.

And have you seen Afghanistan in the few decades that followed? No one is claiming Afghanistan was some wealthy industrialized paradise, but it also wasn't some primitive ungoverned backwater, they at least had a decently functional country. Hell a lot of countries in 2012 still can't even put together a functional capital city. Strangely enough, a lot of advancement between the 50's and 70's came from mass infusions of aid for infrastructure projects among other things from the US and USSR as they fought for influence, before just finally actually fighting.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:47

az jan jananam: Sep 6, 2011; _{"Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I will meet you there."-Rumi}

Amused to Death posted:

And have you seen Afghanistan in the few decades that followed? No one is claiming Afghanistan was some wealthy industrialized paradise, but it also wasn't some primitive ungoverned backwater, they at least had a decently functional country.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:50

DarkSol: May 18, 2006; Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines.

Cjones posted:

The US military?

The court martial system

Sadly, I laughed at this.

HallelujahLee posted:

Could you expand on this does the military have a system in place for soldiers who refuse immoral orders.

Yes, a person can refuse an immoral order.

Read up on United States v. Keenan.

quote:

The Court of Military Appeals held that "the justification for acts done pursuant to orders does not exist if the order was of such a nature that a man of ordinary sense and understanding would know it to be illegal."

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:53

HallelujahLee: May 3, 2009

DarkSol posted:

Sadly, I laughed at this.

Yes, a person can refuse an immoral order.

Read up on United States v. Keenan.

Well hopefully this is the standard.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:56

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 22, 2013 19:11

The Bible: May 8, 2010

fivetwo posted:

This soldier's alleged behavior is not indicative of the behavior of 99.99% of our service men and women.

This would make me feel better if that .01% were punished more often than they are. A lot of them don't receive any punishment at all. That 99.99% is defending and supporting the evil deeds of the .01%.

# ? Mar 12, 2012 03:57

«‹›12 »

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Gas Chamber > US soldier opens fire on Afghan civilians (up to 16 dead)