Iraqi Sniper Released From Prison After Just 5-Years For Killing Two Marines

page: 9
9
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by signal2noise

Originally posted by diamount
Using the OP's logic, let's charge all surviivng WW2 resitance fighters for having the balls to fight against a brutal occupation.


So you think that insurgents in Iraq are "resistant fighters"?

Tell me, when one of these "resistance fighters" blow up a marketplace with women and children, how is that "freeing your country from oppression"?



The OP is about an insurgent that shot two American soldiers. Not a guy that blew up a marketplace. If they had released a guy that blew up a marketplace, the reactions would have been different.

Don´t add things that are irrelevant in this case.




posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
An American insurgent sniper who killed (hypothetical) invaders would probably be honoured as a war hero in...America. The (hypothetical) invader would probably jail him though.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainInstaban
The OP is about an insurgent that shot two American soldiers. Not a guy that blew up a marketplace. If they had released a guy that blew up a marketplace, the reactions would have been different.

Don´t add things that are irrelevant in this case.


Hmmmm....the individual I was quoting was the one bringing up WW2 resistance fighters. I guess that was someone relevant in your eyes, huh?



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by GmoS719
 


If I were you, I wouldn't believe another word that comes out of that family members mouth. There is no way on this earth that a platoon leader would go "on record" ordering the killing of civilians.

MAYBE, he was told to return fire on a hostile, that was in the vicinity of civilians... Our troops may be fighting an unjust war, but they are human beings.. not monsters, like some of you imply.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by signal2noise

Originally posted by CaptainInstaban
The OP is about an insurgent that shot two American soldiers. Not a guy that blew up a marketplace. If they had released a guy that blew up a marketplace, the reactions would have been different.

Don´t add things that are irrelevant in this case.


Hmmmm....the individual I was quoting was the one bringing up WW2 resistance fighters. I guess that was someone relevant in your eyes, huh?


As a matter of fact it is. WW2 resistance fighters were also fighting the invader, just like the guy that was released.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainInstaban
As a matter of fact it is. WW2 resistance fighters were also fighting the invader, just like the guy that was released.


Sorry, Homeslice, but comparing insurgents to WW2 resistance fighters is nonsense.

As Signal2noise said, how is a "resistance fighter" killing his own people "freeing them"? Because that seems to be what most of the insurgents enjoy doing; blowing up their own civilians rather than fighting the US military.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 



When did anyone say this sniper blew up anybody? He killed two invaders. Just because some set off bombs in crowded areas, doesn't mean all (or even most) do.



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 12:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by David291
I know what we could do, I suppose we could count the number of deaths from terrorist attacks around the world and then compare it to the amount of people dead by US/UK hands in all the countries we are currently in.

Which would out weigh the other I wonder?


Edit to add: By that I am not saying it's ok to let terrorist attacks continue, by that I'm saying the way our goverments are dealing with it, is completely wrong.
edit on 24/8/11 by David291 because: (no reason given)


Terrorist attacks have killed thousands of people in the last few years. American forces have killed hundreds of thousands in Iraq alone in the same period.



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by SirTFiedSkeptic
 


All for freedon my friend and democracy so it's well worth it







posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedGod
When did anyone say this sniper blew up anybody? He killed two invaders. Just because some set off bombs in crowded areas, doesn't mean all (or even most) do.


Keep that line of thinking in mind next time someone starts painting the entire US Military with a broad brush.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 



I defend the U.S. Military just as much as I do any other warrior, with the exception of PMCs. This probably stems from the fact that I was a soldier my self.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Echo3Foxtrot
At least we take prisoners and give them fair trial. They don't take prisoners or if they do, they'll kill them without hesitation.


Well regardless of the perceptions on what the other side may or may not do to POW's,we are signatories of and bound by the Geneva convention,though in certain combat situations it can take all ones willpower to exercise restraint when dealing with captured enemy combatants,however,we are only taking one more step towards the abyss
if we don't apply the conditions of the appropriate treaty/convention in these circumstances.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by -W1LL
 


Well our prisoners of war in North Vietnam were released after the war. And those POW's were responsible for war crimes... So go figure.
edit on 9/9/2011 by LibertarianExpress because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
It's horrible that those young men were killed, but it's war. American soldiers are not being imprisoned for killing Iraqis.

ETA: Though I have to say, I think the second killing of the soldier rescuing his buddy may have been a war crime, but I'm not expert.


It's not a war crime. It's actually just frowned upon to target a medical unit in the field. This was a custom that started in the first world war when medics would need to go into no mans land to recover bodies and victims. Snipers wouldn't target medics as they worked on or removed bodies.


But if the sniper was shooting from a civilian building wearing civilian cloths, that'd be considered a war crime..... Check on the Geneva conventions for more information.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by LibertarianExpress
It's not a war crime. It's actually just frowned upon to target a medical unit in the field. This was a custom that started in the first world war when medics would need to go into no mans land to recover bodies and victims. Snipers wouldn't target medics as they worked on or removed bodies.


But if the sniper was shooting from a civilian building wearing civilian cloths, that'd be considered a war crime..... Check on the Geneva conventions for more information.


It's against the Geneva Conventions to fire on anyone wearing a Red Cross, Cresent, or Red Lion.





top topics
 
9
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join