| - DIHQ'S CELEBRITY BOXING POLL -> more Murkin war crimes against humanity....ho hum. | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: more Murkin war crimes against humanity....ho hum. |
| Posted By: legion Posted On: May 4, 2004 Views: 314 | more Murkin war crimes against humanity....ho hum. The FRENCH media is showing this video of brave Murkins playing their video game war shooting farmers in the middle of the night. Atta boy Rambo, way to make that world safe for dumbocracy and freedumb. The FRENCH have pointed out that this is clearly a violation of the Geneva Convention on War Crimes - America doesn't care because they have no rules, no morals and no ethics they just do whatever they want and claim might makes right. Watch the brave Murkin soldier shoot the wounded guy writhing on the ground. What a great hero. What a man. the French attack! The video (been on the net since last year) Rambo fun |
| Posted By: Tangler100 Posted On: May 4, 2004 Views: 303 | Condemnation isn't good enough. I didn't download and playback the video, but I'll take your word for it as to what it shows, after clicking over to the site. No one voted me nor appointed me to represent anyone, but I condemn this barbarism on behalf of Shrub, and, having said that, I'll also say simple condemnation ISN'T good enough. In a case like this, it looks like court-martials are not just adviseable, but mandatory, and those guilty have to be punished big-time. One morsel of food for thought: The best way to prevent this horrible crap from happening in the first place is to use non-lethal weapons AFTER the first debilitating blow has been struck, IF AND ONLY IF IT WAS JUDGED THAT THE USE OF "LETHAL" FORCE WAS AT LEAST POSSIBLY JUSTIFIED AT FIRST. If decided that that's the case, THEN you use "lethal" force to debilitate (not necessarily to kill) someone. You then subsequently use non-lethal force ONLY if futher necessary to stop and contain someone. There is no pat or constant answer for all situations, which means sometimes it can be a close call, and I mean a damn close call. Let the guilty ones pay, and pay dearly, as each case is looked at. Does that mean I personally would be as quick to execute a convicted war criminal who was guilty of a capital war crime (i.e., purposely, willingly, and knowlingly caused the death of an innocent civilian or non-combatant POW) as quickly as I would a combat enemy ??? This may come as a bit of a shocker to some, but, I've always believed in upholding consistent values, so, I have to tell ya', as much as it would pain me, yes, I would. (Go ahead--I know by sayin' that I'm probably causing a big arguement to ensue, so go ahead and dump on me if you want. I'm always willing to keep an open mind and listen.) War is hell. |
| Posted By: legion Posted On: May 4, 2004 Views: 299 | RE: poor naive Tangler, all tangled up.... No, the way to prevent such things is, if you MUST fight a war be sure it's a war of self defense, not Imperial aggression. That's why in real wars you don't need a draft...the people they just come forward by the millions to enlist because they know what is at stake (as in WW2). However, in wars of Imperial aggression the people instead burn their draft cards, claim 4-F or C/O status, or simply run to Canada where they don't involve themselves in wars of conquest. Only in self defense, and only as a last resort. In the fifty years since WW2 America has taken up one Imperial crusade after another making war a FIRST RESORT instead of a last one. War Incorporated America needs to get out of the war business. That is all. |
| Posted By: Tangler100 Posted On: May 4, 2004 Views: 288 | Imperialism is bad ??? No arguement there. Allow me the privilege my dear pal Legionnaire to pose a direct question: For a minute, take the oil factor completely out of the world political equation. Assume it has absolutely nothing to do with any form of 'Murkin ulterior bravado, 'Murkin Imperialism (conquest), or 'Murkin-supported "New World Order", period. In other words, assume ALL nations have ample oil supplies or at least possess the ability to acquire them with no problem whatsoever (via international trade agreements; direct purchase on the world markets; etc.) Oil is completely a non-issue. Now along comes Country A, which has a record of international harrassment (e.g., treaty violations with its neighbors--as Germany did BEFORE it seized Czech land in '38, which, BTW, was a sufficient cause for war to begin right then and there). Now, let's also say that it's known with CERTAINTY (not by the say-so of the farktards at the CIA), but, say, by first-hand eye-witness accounts and direct visual evidence, that Country A is--with emphasis--involved in setting up a massive military WMD program (nuclear; chem-bio; etc.) No war has yet broken out; no actual attack has yet occurred; but the years go by as Country A builds more and more WMD's. Question: Would you say that NO nation, unless it wants to be guilty of Imperialism, should militarily step in and pre-emptively attack Country A to stop it from continuing its WMD program, or would you wait until Country A actually invaded and started the war ??? If you choose the option of saying no nation should do anything, then how else, in order to contain or restrain Country A from starting a war, short of building up the NEIGHBORING countries' stockpiles of WMD (in other words, initiating a "Cold War-style" 'Murkin-Soviet-style "detente" policy by boosting the total quantities of WMD's in all the countries in the area), would you counter the threat from Country A ??? Remember, this means that no war of defense is in the scenario just yet, so going to war is, according to your view, not justified as a last resort. I await your freedumb-loving, enlightening answer, with the hope that my tangled intellect can discern true genius. |
| Posted By: Tangler100 Posted On: May 4, 2004 Views: 287 | (Additionally,...) (Just one more additional point. In addition to taking oil completely out of the picture, let's also take the factor of that great 'Murkinville Patriotic Goal of demanding that ALL nations must have a democracy-style of Gubbermint. Assume that 'Murkinville didn't even give a fark about that. Personally, I do--with emphasis--believe that NOT every nation on this earth HAS to have a democracy. That's all--I await your Great Revelation.) |
| Posted By: François Montepelier Posted On: May 4, 2004 Views: 280 | The American pig dogs! I am mad as a man hat and mad at the yankee pigs for their killing and deaths on innocent people and how they lie and lie and lie all they time to world peopele to only be hypocrit to all world I am mad again and challenge all america to tell truth and admit they are war mongering nations who do anything to secure oil for their fat people to drive woman cars that are big and then cocks peni mere small they stupid pig furkers! JSK is pleasing his small penis watching usa soldiers killing french farmers in field like terrorists all world know america is. It is disgusting me very big. The english too are stinking englishmen with their stupid lapdog leader Mein Blair the ****er of Tiny president Bush the apeman with faulty mouth who cannot speak well. He sounds like a pig furker who is high on the drugs things and he has no brain it is hashed out on weed like a fool. Only american people like him because they are fat and stupid not intelligent people like the French who are cultured and educated unlike English who fight with the soccer and hooligans like odiots. Screw USA and UK, they all pig furker nation I hate them at their more killing of innocent Iraqi people. President Bush say he want to help Iraq, and then he sends pig furker soldiers to kill Iraqi people, what is in his mad mind thing like he is insane Hitler dictator. Furk USA up the ass! Shame on you killers! I don't care, I am French! François Montepelier |
| Posted By: alfonsothefan Posted On: May 4, 2004 Views: 277 | RE: Frankie! Where you been?! Well, I'll be darned! Here, Hutch of Araby and I were just talking about you several weeks back and now you appear! Hey, you're correct about those lousy English. By gawd, did you see Lawrence of Arabia? How about Exodus? Anyway, only Hutch knows the description of our illustious Field Marshall and yes, now I know as well. For ocho pe...er, ouit francs (is that how you spell it?) I'll tell you about him; oui, he is dashing in his military uniform, but nothing like you guys from France! By gawd, I remember seeing pictures of your troops in Indo-China in the early 50's...just before ya'll got your assess whupped by a buncha gooks! But hey, this is the 'net, where all things are possible. Why not 'make up' war stories about the 'nam? Works for some gigalo over here named Lurch. Hell, with a bottle of Jack and a couplea tokes, you guys just re-took Dien Bien Phu! Again, great to see you, but hey, let up on our man killer, ya might get some hemp for your troubles! hehehe... atf, Friend of Francois |
| Posted By: JSK Posted On: May 5, 2004 Views: 238 | RE: Talk about heated justice! Nice clip Leege ole boy. You were babbling this a few months back if I remember correctly ... although usually I Wouldn't. Yeah, I'll admit that aint too cool smoking those dudes just for target practice, but the url of the story wasn't coming up so I don't know the whole story or why this happened. I'm sure its all be chalked up as the "wrong place wrong time" sort of deal if its not strong arming the media right now. Ofcourse with all the towelhead torture I'm sure it'll come up (more so on forign tv) Musta deserved it. Right FRANCE-ASS !(LOL) Duuuuuuuude thank God your o-tay! You were feared to be one of the lost. Now come to realize the only thing you lost was your french-fry litle mind. Its obvious farming might not be such a great career move anymore for you French people. So now besides nothing what else will you do? Later France-ass the farmer- JSK |