I don't see how you can claim that his is delusional and a liar in view of posts that you have been replied to. Apparently it is you squirming without reading?.... Sooooo your opinion and for the record: he is either delusional or a liar, and later he is also a merderous thug regardless following orders or not. Hmmm I thought a soldier was trained to follow orders, but that's another story on what discretion he can have in following his chain of command orders Nice try, I don't recall "redirecting" a response to you with a "warmonger statement" If I did I stand down and corrected. However; I do fully agree with the rest from your above statement.
There is nothing logically inconsistent here. You are simply logically impaired. If you think there is a logical problem here, why dont you break it down for us in a formal format and point it out. Show us EXACTLY where the contradiction lies. peace axeman
lol I was wondering how long will it take you to crawl from under that rock of yours and start uninvited attacks. yer better change your signature to: war axeman (the always have an ax to grind and hold grudges)-man ????
What attack Nolan? Care to quote it? Since you think there is a logical inconsistency where there isnt, the label of logically impaired is a proper one, not an attack. Further, I see that you didnt bother to comment on anything I actually said. Thank you for clarifying you have a defenseless position You also didnt answer my challenge to show us EXACTLY where the contradiction is. Once again proving, you have no position. Welp.... guess there is nothing left to discuss. Turok already completely debunked you, and you were caught with your pants down claiming logical inconsistencies which are not even there I think you better change YOUR signature to something like: "Logically impaired, unsupported assertion man" peace axeman
Judging from previous exchanges with you, you are truly incapable of reading and understanding simple statements. Your reasoning is blinded by you fanatic attitude of always attacking invited or not. Just re-read what you posted and your reference to my statement. I see yer already hurting... Ofc I fully expect you to continue with name calling -already you have started-, bring up the rest of your "handles", speaking for others etc....in a final attempt to degrade another thread to your usual pissing contest. Hey! you are who you are.. enjoy it. look there is a comma missing somewhere, go rant about it.:eek: :eek:
The interview seemed to be either reported badly, or conducted poorly. Either way, the answers were indeed inconsistent, so the subject of the interview may be mostly to blame. (anything is possible). We have no way of knowing. Sometimes interviews just don't work. Some people are better off not having their own words used to make their case. A good journalist needs to interpret the sense of some people for them. (Yes, the arguments against this are easy enough to understand...but reality is what it is). Somehow, no matter where the fault lies for the lack of consistency and logic, there is something wrong with the whole picture as we read what was reported in this instance. Personally, I get the sense that this Marine was being pretty forthcoming. And genuinely remorseful of his actions. That his message was as NVS interpreted it. Makes me feel sorry for the guy, yes, but not ready to excuse his behavior. I do see Turok's points....there are big inconsistencies. There is at least a chance that the Marine was somehow trying to paint himself as a conscientious guy after the fact. Anyone here who can make 100% sense out of what was printed is a better man than I....I can't read anyone's mind. No one can. What this Marine was thinking at the time of the interview may indeed have very little to do with what he was thinking at the time of the incidents. But what is most disturbing to me is that there is NO good side to this "story". If we are to believe that the Marine had only the interests of the innocent at heart, then we would be foolish. He admits to shooting non combatants in civilian clothing. Who may indeed pose potential threats, but where do you draw the line? When their hands are in the air seems a pretty good place for starters. If we are to believe that the guy had remorse (which is certainly better than not having remorse, but not the same as being "innocent"), he is then guilty of having killed first and questioned himself later (EC said shoot first ask questions later....referring not to questions of one's own behavior but of those shot...a completely different issue). All in all though, what NVS cited as the Marine's justification for his apparently unlawful acts was "following orders". NVS even wrote it in all caps. But..... Following orders is no excuse (no matter that it seems very lately that American troops have been using that excuse fairly regularly). The Nuremberg Trials made it very clear to the whole world that uniformed soldiers are indeed responsible for their own behavior. ALL soldiers are taught the lessons of the rules of war during Basic Training or Boot Camp just as this Marine surely did. When it comes to breaking the law...Laws of war in this case, the rules are clearly spelled out. It is no different than breaking laws as civilians. Except for the fact that as civilians, we are not explained all the rules. We know you cannot rob a bank. We know you cannot kill a guy with a knife in a bar. But we don't know all the laws. Soldiers, however, are taught the laws that apply to them. Two things about the law are consistent in any system....military or civilian....and within any system of government. 1. Following orders if the orders are illegal is a crime. 2. Ignorance of the law never justifies breaking the law. So this Marine has either been misquoted, or has mixed up his actions. No way does what he claims to have happened excuse his behavior if the behavior is as he described it (which may certainly be not the case....we have no way of knowing by reading what was presented to us). No matter what the facts of the case are, the story is sad indeed. Peace, RS
its plain and simple Nolan...and believe u me I have been against the WAR from the get go ( because of soldier casualty and innocent lives being lost).....but too many times inncoent soldiers have been hurt or killed by so called innocent plain old Iraqi civilians...surely you cant argue this...so knowing that and having only fractions of seconds to act .......what may seem cruel or inhumane or immoral or whatever other name you want to give it may in fact save your life.....In a time of WAR which is what we are in ( at least our soldiers not us ) its kill or be killed...and i for one would like to have most of our soldiers return to their families...Hey Bush may have been wrong and this WAR may be wrong but I dont think our soldiers have much choice in certain situations....
Thats right Nolan. Keep dodging the ENTIRE issue. Dont bother answering my challenge and proving anything you have stated. Also, stop being a total hypocrite and attacking me with nonsense like: Judging from previous exchanges with you, you are truly incapable of reading and understanding simple statements and then CRYING like a little baby for being attacked You are CLEARLY scared to discuss this with me because you know you will be logically shred into tiny little pieces. Your constant dodging and crying is all the evidence we need. Thank you very much for showing what a coward you are with no position at all Other handles?? Sorry to inform you Nolan, but I only have a single handle and you can check with Baron. Cross check IP addresses if you must. Im sure it makes you FEEL better to think there is only one person destroying you in debate, but the sad truth is, EVERYONE is slicing you to pieces. And no... I dont have to complain about a missing comma, because your arument is so weak you yourself refuse to even defend it as you are proving right now by side stepping it yet AGAIN. You have officially run away from the debate and have conceded. Have a nice day peace axeman
Well well well.... it seems yet ANOTHER person see's the glaring inconsistencies NOLAN I guess this means that Error 404 is another one of my aliases right? LMAOOOOOOO Dude... you have no case. Oh... but we already know that because you refuse to even defend it Like I said.... logically impaired. The label fits. peace axeman