That is because you are a loony fundamentalist just like the Saudi payrolled crazies.

This kind of phrasing directed to another forum member could be seen as nonproductive and provacative.

I got a better grasp on things that than I let on, so why have we been there this long ???? WW 2 in less time, why are you so upset that some dumb marines p'd on some corpse I'm p'd that we have been there longer than we needed to be with no plans on winning. Yeah by the way, I can't handle seeing my country being turned into a socalist crap hole, and the job went to the way side because of socalist crap hole policies, hope you will enjoy what's comeing, Haiti is starting to look like better place to be. A few p'd on corpses will be the least of our worries enjoy the 5 dollar a gallon for gas and what comes with that.

That's ok I'm a big boy I can handle it I can take it as well as I can dish it out. Some people just can't handle the truth. after all this is the internet, I had to steal that, that was pretty good

...says person who claims that USA is becoming socialist. :roll:

Your beloved country is still much more capitalistic than most other countries and Obama's plans are not going to change that (and no I don't agree all of them). Could you please help me to understand you (instead of getting angry) by explaining what the heck you mean with socialism?

noted:salute:

Because it is counter productive.
If urinating on a corpse would help get a positive solution it might perhaps be a little bit justifyable to some small extent.
But as it doesn't in the slightest it is just plain stupid.

Perhaps you should have invested back when Georgy went playing silly buggers in Mesopotamia, I thank you for your $5 a gallon donations:up:

Can ya'll take that discussion to another thread?

Back to the topic - I still say use the fire defence.................

Good point. :salute:

@yubba: Could you please answer using PM?

No, try again.

you don't win a war by beeing nastier then the enemy...simple as that...
beeing nasty just makes you not any better then what you're fighting.

You beat someone by beeing better then them.
I know well enough you can't make war prettier...but isn't needed to literally piss all over it.

HunterICX

In Afghanistan, Western troops are "better" than the Taliban and tribal factions. Better training, better comms, better weapons. And still - strategic defeat.

In Iraq 03, US and British troops were "better" than the mutlitude of enemy groups they faced. Better training, better, comms, better weapons, better CCCI. And still - stratgeic defeat.

In Lebanon 06, Israel was "better". Better weapons, comms, an air froce, tanks, better in everything. Still - strategic defeat.

In Vietnam, it is often claimed the US won every major engagement on the ground. The US was better: better in weapons, comms, CCCI. And still - strategic defeat.

What were the other sides superior in? Determination. The ability to suffer. Holding their breath for longer than the West.

The most ridiculous example was Iraq 91: here we must no argue who was better. And then - the victory was simply handed over on a silver plate. I honstely think that Bush senior should be courtmartialed and shot for this high treason.

You do not win wars be being better. You do not win wars by scaring the enemy.


You win wars by being determined to kill the enemy and to destroy what is his, and not allowing anything or anyone to stand between you and your objectives, may it be causes, nations, politics, scruples, persons, or whatever.

Yes, look at the French. They went crazy and squashed a small problem but it in turn created a huge one that kicked them to pieces


Is that the one where people decided that overthrowing Saddam would be a silly thing to do and it would fracture the country while strenghthening Iran as a regional power.
I could have sworn that a person who goes by the name of Skybird held such views very forcefully over a decade ofter that.
Then again that would also be the Skybird who regularly wanted the Americans hauled up for war crimes as well as all those in the Balkans whose savagery and disregard for the laws of war had left so many shattered lives he had to deal with.

The whole idea of winning even a total war by being nastier than your enemy is debatable. But you especially don't win non-wars by being worse than the enemy. In my view, Afghanistan is very much a non-war - and I don't mean that as an insult, just that it's not really a war in any traditional sense. It is far from a total war, and it is arguably not even really a civil war. It is a weird sort of policing operation with cloudy objectives. And in a policing situation, you know what happens when "the law" gets brutal. Rarely ends well.

One of the fundamental problems here of course is that something like the Marine Corps is not and cannot be a police force. That's not what they're for, that's not how they work. Again, I find it facetious of the authorities to scapegoat 4 Marines here when the real blame should lie with those who put them there to do a job that they're fundamentally unqualified for, all for the delusion of a 'clean war' that is neither clean nor a war.

Even if the enemy fights dirty, one should not lower it self to same level.

Skybird use those words several times "strategic defeat"

The I-countries gonna lose every war from now and until Judgement Day
(A war is two thing 1.winning the battle. 2.Winning the peace)

You know why the I-countries gonna lose every war??

we are so keen to observe the various rights, such as human rights, etc., Would i argue that in the heat of war and subsequent random eliminate these rights? For this I must say-I do not know. I think that we should not lower ourselves down to their level. On the other hand, we must sometimes override certain rights. For do we not, we gonna lose every war , in the future.

Markus

It's easy for one to sit in the morally righteous high chair and cast judgement if they've never been in a situation where they were pushed hard enough to question their own morals to begin with, nor would they know what their really capable of.

More 2 cents worth from the peanut gallery.

The desecration of enemy bodies in war is nothing new. The whole idea in war is total domination of your enemy. The physiological aspect of this can't be denied. Terrorizing and demoralizing the enemy is just part of the deal.

During WW2 the famed 1st Special Service Force, The Black Devils, would go out on night recon, kill enemy sentries and leave this calling card on their bodies and fortifications.

http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/5...ilsbrigade.jpg

DAS DICKE ENDE KOMMT NOCH! ... THE WORST IS YET TO COME!

The brigade's casualty rate was 39 percent. My guess is they 'may' have done more than leave calling cards. Again it's nothing new. The message being delivered has always been: Don't mess with us!

This isn't about being nastier than your enemy. I doubt if they think of it at that level. It's more personal than that. Those dead guys were trying to kill those Marines. They don't care what you call it; non war, police action or whatever. The reality doesn't change. Pissing on a dead body is NOT the worst thing that happens in a war. Killing innocent civilians beats that by a little. As Rockstar said "I sure as heck wouldn't want to do what these Marines are doing." For that reason I refuse to pass judgement on this event. I'll let the media experts do that.

To all NATO forces in Afghanistan, good luck and safe return.