War Crimes Inquiry

[indago]

From The Associated Press 2 January 2016:
--------------------------------------------------------------
The head of an official British investigation into alleged abuses during the Iraq War says that U.K. soldiers may face prosecution for crimes including murder. Mark Warwick said the inquiry is probing "lots of significant cases" and officials will discuss whether they meet the war crimes threshold.
--------------------------------------------------------------

article (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_BRITAIN_IRAQ?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-01-02-07-16-10)

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

From The Associated Press 2 January 2016:
--------------------------------------------------------------
The head of an official British investigation into alleged abuses during the Iraq War says that U.K. soldiers may face prosecution for crimes including murder. Mark Warwick said the inquiry is probing "lots of significant cases" and officials will discuss whether they meet the war crimes threshold.
--------------------------------------------------------------

article (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_BRITAIN_IRAQ?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-01-02-07-16-10)

Just more trying to placate their muslim masters as they choose to sacrifice their bravest and best thinking that such actions buys them something(gratitude etc.) from that lying murdering pack of wolves they have spent so many decades inviting in to feast on them!!!!
Now instead of kicking the vermin out they try to please them and show how honorable and moral they are!!!!
When truth is, only conversion into that murdering hate filled cult buys anything!!!!
All non-muslims are to be converted , killed or enslaved--read the damn book you ignorant ass -Brits!!!!!!-Tyr

[Noir]

All non-muslims are to be converted , killed or enslaved--read the damn book you ignorant ass -Brits!!!!!!-Tyr

Regardless of the Islamic position in the conflict, if a British solider commits a war crime then they have committed a war crime. It's not okay for a solider to walk into a house, shoot the children and rape the women because 'they are Muslims and believe all non-Muslims are to be converted, killed or enslave'.

There is a clear and correct stance that we are not there to rape, pillage, and murder.

[Gunny]

Just more trying to placate their muslim masters as they choose to sacrifice their bravest and best thinking that such actions buys them something(gratitude etc.) from that lying murdering pack of wolves they have spent so many decades inviting in to feast on them!!!!
Now instead of kicking the vermin out they try to please them and show how honorable and moral they are!!!!
When truth is, only conversion into that murdering hate filled cult buys anything!!!!
All non-muslims are to be converted , killed or enslaved--read the damn book you ignorant ass -Brits!!!!!!-Tyr

Strictly speaking they screwed up by leaving anyone alive to talk about it. You send my ass off to get shot at, don't be Monday morning quarterbacking how I get the job done.

[namvet]

so you carry a book of rules while being shot at ???

[Noir]

Strictly speaking they screwed up by leaving anyone alive to talk about it. You send my ass off to get shot at, don't be Monday morning quarterbacking how I get the job done.

Do do you believe solders should be held accountable for their actions?


so you carry a book of rules while being shot at ???

I Know right, how weird, imagine there being such a thing a rules in the military.

[Gunny]

so you carry a book of rules while being shot at ???


Sure. It's called shoot first and when in doubt, shoot first. But then you know that, you just wanted ME to say it. I'm going home to Mama and the babies, and I'm taking every swinging d*ck with me back to theirs that I can. Don't get in the way.

[Gunny]

Do do you believe solders should be held accountable for their actions?



I Know right, how weird, imagine there being such a thing a rules in the military.

What I think is try going out there yourself and being the one shot at. Or the lives of the men you break bread with every day for years are on the line. You know their families and you got a wuss for an OIC that can find every reason in the world to be drinking coffee in the rear with the staff.

If you commit a crime, you should be held accountable. You shouldn't be held accountable by some armchair quarterback like you 7 years later for a decision you've less than a second to make. It takes a 7.62 mm round about a second and a half to travel 1000 meters. Wait, let me whip out my cell and ask for a consensus opinion from the non-players. You're dead. Not even enough time to call 911. They didn't even have cells when I was in. And the enemy loves to focus on the guy humping the PRC-77 easily identifiable by the antenna.

You need to stick to your Monday morning QB and blame game job. You'd be washing a lot of dishes in the galley if you were in my damned company.

There's NO way that many crimes were committed and especially by Brits. Those guys have the rulebook tattooed on the inside of their eyelids. Used to drive me nuts being around them.

Try blaming the criminals. And you can choose -- the ones that start the war or the asshats that send us off to fight it with a bunch of stupid rules.

[Noir]

If you commit a crime, you should be held accountable.

Then we agree, the rest is for the commission.

[Gunny]

Then we agree, the rest is for the commission.

Not even close. The "commission" is a bunch of people like YOU. Never been under fire. Never seen anyone die. Y'all sit around polishing chairs with your asses. Who do you think you are to judge us?

[Drummond]

Then we agree, the rest is for the commission.

This is just more witch-hunt stuff. Presumably some of our Lefties at unhappy about the inordinate delay of the Chilcot Inquiry to finish its business and report on its findings (FIVE years and counting, on that one !!!) ... so, now, we've got something else designed to make up for the lack of hoped-for result. Whatever it takes, eh, for the British Public to be convinced that the Iraq War just HAS to be discredited and demonised in whatever way can be contrived.

Perhaps Piers Morgan will be the evidence collector on this one ?? He was editor of the Daily Mirror, which ran a story on supposed 'abuses' by British service personnel, subsequently found to be COMPLETELY BOGUS. Morgan was sacked ... and never apologised for what he'd done, saying that even despite REAL evidence, he was sure the story had to have some sort of truth to it.

And now, since so little actual demonisation has fully succeeded .. what a surprise, we now have ANOTHER attempt at it. If this one fails, something else will be invented .. until, finally, the Left has its way and they've 'discredited' it fully. The Left is absolutely determined that America never again gains our support in these sorts of issues.

A question for Noir. If a British soldier is being attacked, and has to make a split second decision as to how to react, would you rather that the British soldier lost his life to ensure that his decision was unquestionably a 'proper' one .. ?

Who deserves to be considered preferentially ? THE ENEMY ??

[Drummond]

Do do you believe solders should be held accountable for their actions?



I Know right, how weird, imagine there being such a thing a rules in the military.

... Yes, the first thing a British soldier should do, when under fire and under extreme threat of being killed, is to pull out a pocket manual and flip through various pages (no doubt cross-referencing as he goes) to see if his response meets strict military criteria in such circumstances !! Perhaps he should also go online and do a Google search, while he's at it (he might want to use the 'I'm Feeling Lucky' button) ??

[Noir]

A question for Noir. If a British soldier is being attacked, and has to make a split second decision as to how to react, would you rather that the British soldier lost his life to ensure that his decision was unquestionably a 'proper' one .. ?

If you are being attacked and you respond in kind then you are not a war criminal.

[Noir]

Not even close. The "commission" is a bunch of people like YOU. Never been under fire. Never seen anyone die. Y'all sit around polishing chairs with your asses. Who do you think you are to judge us?

So you would rather a military commission of ex-servicemen do the judging?

[Black Diamond]

So you would rather a military commission of ex-servicemen do the judging?

Combat veterans ideally

[Noir]

Combat veterans ideally

I would see a problem with that as long as it followed the same due process as any civil commission, however,regardless of the background of those on the commission - the troops themselves are aware they they serve the state, and the states civil sector has the authority to investigate their actions.

[Elessar]

So you would rather a military commission of ex-servicemen do the judging?

Noir, you are in over your head again.
If you can provide proven incidents, that is one thing.
But to generalize in the whiney leftist mode is pure BS.

How much combat experience do you have so that you
feel you can preach to these combat vets?

It is like judging a cop that has to pull a trigger to save his
skin or that of others.

There are no rule books in the field you can refer to when a
split-second judgement needs to be made.

[Gunny]

So you would rather a military commission of ex-servicemen do the judging?

Matter of fact, yes. I want combat Marines to judge me, not some mommy's basement dwelling know it all that hasn't been in a fight since kindergarten. And I'd rather I judge your Marines than you chair-polishers who never had to get out and do shit. You let US do your fighting for you, then want to accuse us of doing it.

You and your commission can kiss my ass. Waking up in your comfortable beds in a nice warm house and not listening to artillery all fucking night long sleeping in the sand with giant black flies that'll chew your ass up and getting less food per day than this baby gets. Then you got some ass shooting at you. You turn on your tube and snuggle under your blanky like a good little soldier.

Don't tell ME what my game is. I don't mind civilians that support us. But I detest the ones that want to criticize us for fighting to win and surviving. Y'all suck. You've never done a damned thing to earn your freedom yet you want to persecute those that have done it for you.

[Perianne]

Do do you believe solders should be held accountable for their actions?



I Know right, how weird, imagine there being such a thing a rules in the military.

There should be one rule in combat: Crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women.

I swear. I am a 58 year-old woman, 5 feet tall, 115 pounds, and I am more manly than some of our men on here.

[Gunny]

I would see a problem with that as long as it followed the same due process as any civil commission, however,regardless of the background of those on the commission - the troops themselves are aware they they serve the state, and the states civil sector has the authority to investigate their actions.

More basement BS? We serve each other and accomplish the task assigned to us. In the end it's about not letting your brother down. Why do you think so many of us hate that Bergdahl fuck? He broke down the team and let down his responsibility to his fellow soldiers. Then got at least 6 killed looking for his ass. I'd have shot him myself to spare those 6.

Stupid civilian politicians have no right to judge us for anything. As I've repeatedly told you, get your ass out there. Then tell me about it. You live in some fantasy entitlement world. Well, you don't deserve shit because you were born. You deserve what you're willing to fight for. And I fight to win and don't give a damn about your stupid rules.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Noir, your liberal insanity is showing IMHO. A solider often has to make a decision it 2 tenths of a second and you think civilians should judge him!
Or asshats that never served a day or ever where shot at.
Ragheads out there need to be shot, not babied and pampered as were the bastards at Club Gitmo--thanks to the ffing idiot obama (a muslim in hiding)...
War is full of mistakes, get used to it and stop blathering how brave men should suffer for any mistakes later!
You that have not a damn clue think your judgment and haughtiness superior!!
Typical lib arrogance IMHO..-TYR

[Drummond]

Noir, your liberal insanity is showing IMHO. A solider often has to make a decision it 2 tenths of a second and you think civilians should judge him!
Or asshats that never served a day or ever where shot at.
Ragheads out there need to be shot, not babied and pampered as were the bastards at Club Gitmo--thanks to the ffing idiot obama (a muslim in hiding)...
War is full of mistakes, get used to it and stop blathering how brave men should suffer for any mistakes later!
You that have not a damn clue think your judgment and haughtiness superior!!
Typical lib arrogance IMHO..-TYR

Exactly.

Our soldiers are being buried under a mountain of PC crap .. and we need to get on board the understanding that WHAT MATTERS IS TO DEFEAT THE ENEMY, and that those doing the defeating DESERVE OUR FULLEST POSSIBLE SUPPORT.

What's the Leftie approach ? To ensure that soldiers carry around with them a massive weight of PC thinking, to the point where instinct is stifled, in favour instead of a mindset which could remove the instinctual speed vital for full effectiveness.

The result could be a dead soldier, instead of a dead enemy.

Noir, it'd be good if you could tell us that this is NOT your preferred outcome.

[fj1200]

Noir, you are in over your head again.
If you can provide proven incidents, that is one thing.
But to generalize in the whiney leftist mode is pure BS.

How much combat experience do you have so that you
feel you can preach to these combat vets?

It is like judging a cop that has to pull a trigger to save his
skin or that of others.

There are no rule books in the field you can refer to when a
split-second judgement needs to be made.

You're generalizing more than noir. The whole story was about "may face prosecution" and an inquiry that is looking into incidents. Most here are apparently wiling to give the benefit of the doubt to the soldiers in every situation while decrying any thought that some Brits might have committed a war crime. And it seems that there are Rule of Engagement for a reason no matter what split-second decisions need to be made. I'd be surprised if any "split-second decisions" will lead to any charges of war crimes anyway.

[Elessar]

You're generalizing more than noir. I'd be surprised if any "split-second decisions" will lead to any charges of war crimes anyway.

I am generalizing nothing.

I am pointing out that the typical liberal knee-jerk reaction to anything is to make assumptions
without solid evidence.

Noir and liberals that have never worn a uniform or pinned on a badge are always
fine and good - to themselves - to sit back and judge something they have not
a single concrete clue on.

I believe these vets here would support an investigation if there was proof of some
wrongdoings. They are all quite honorable.

But to broad-brush and pass judgement without proof, experience, or knowledge is
a standard Liberal whining point.

Drummond summed it up quite well in the post above yours.

[fj1200]

I am generalizing nothing.

I am pointing out that the typical liberal knee-jerk reaction to anything is to make assumptions
without solid evidence.

Noir and liberals that have never worn a uniform or pinned on a badge as always
fine and good - to themselves - to sit back and judge something they have not
a single concrete clue on.

I believe these vets here would support an investigation if there was proof of some
wrongdoings. They are all quite honorable.

But to broad-brush and pass judgement without proof, experience, or knowledge is
a standard Liberal whining point.

Drummond summed it up quite well in the post above yours.

No he didn't; he's to paranoid of lefties hiding under his bed. But I digress, this whole thread is a generalization. "May" and an "inquiry" are by definition a generalization thus the only evidence is at the specific case level. The knee-jerk reaction here is how dare anyone investigate suspicious circumstances in war.

[Perianne]

No he didn't; he's to paranoid of lefties hiding under his bed. But I digress, this whole thread is a generalization. "May" and an "inquiry" are by definition a generalization thus the only evidence is at the specific case level. The knee-jerk reaction here is how dare anyone investigate suspicious circumstances in war.

fj, you have shown interest in conservatism. Here is conservative wisdom:

There should be one rule in combat: Crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women.

[fj1200]

fj, you have shown interest in conservatism. Here is conservative wisdom:

There should be one rule in combat: Crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women.


Conservatism by Conan the Barbarian? Interesting. I wonder if Conan had Rules of Engagement.

[Elessar]

No he didn't; he's to paranoid of lefties hiding under his bed. But I digress, this whole thread is a generalization. "May" and an "inquiry" are by definition a generalization thus the only evidence is at the specific case level. The knee-jerk reaction here is how dare anyone investigate suspicious circumstances in war.

Yet it is all a typical Liberal ploy to force PC thinking on the masses:

Make assumptions;

Offer condemnation;

Judge with out proof;

Judge without personal experience.

Are you his protector? Gunny has been nastier than me but will
you go after him? Nope...You won't.

I stand my ground.

[Gunny]

You're generalizing more than noir. The whole story was about "may face prosecution" and an inquiry that is looking into incidents. Most here are apparently wiling to give the benefit of the doubt to the soldiers in every situation while decrying any thought that some Brits might have committed a war crime. And it seems that there are Rule of Engagement for a reason no matter what split-second decisions need to be made. I'd be surprised if any "split-second decisions" will lead to any charges of war crimes anyway.

What you see is vets closing ranks. I would not tolerate criminal activity. There's a BIG difference to us what that is and what it is to those who have never been there.

Almost 2k accusations? BS. I served alongside Brits. Royal Marines just don't act like that. They're bigger sticklers for the rules than I am, and that's going some. This is political BS, pure and simple.

[Noir]

What you see is vets closing ranks. I would not tolerate criminal activity. There's a BIG difference to us what that is and what it is to those who have never been there.

Almost 2k accusations? BS. I served alongside Brits. Royal Marines just don't act like that. They're bigger sticklers for the rules than I am, and that's going some. This is political BS, pure and simple.

And maybe only a handful of the accusations are truthful war crimes, it is up to the commission to locate the war crimes (if any) committed and act accordingly. To that end I support the investigation to both bring war criminals to justice, and clear the names of those who have been wrongly accused.

[Gunny]

And maybe only a handful of the accusations are truthful war crimes, it is up to the commission to locate the war crimes (if any) committed and act accordingly. To that end I support the investigation to both bring war criminals to justice, and clear the names of those who have been wrongly accused.

It's NOT up to a commission. It's up to valid evidence and the accusers.

[Drummond]

And maybe only a handful of the accusations are truthful war crimes, it is up to the commission to locate the war crimes (if any) committed and act accordingly. To that end I support the investigation to both bring war criminals to justice, and clear the names of those who have been wrongly accused.

I'm seeing this time and again from the Left. A show of 'we must stand for, and promote, justice' ... whereas, the TRUTH is that what's wanted is the furtherance of a demonisation agenda through mudslinging.

Be honest, Noir. You want the British presence in Iraq to be as discredited as possible, so as to create an environment so toxic that no British politician would dream of committing British forces ever again ... for fear of committing political suicide in the process.

The Left wants these 'inquiries', and will be extremely loathe to argue against them. No doubt the extreme slowness of the Chilcot Inquiry aggravates them, bringing their discrediting efforts into disrepute .. so, greater galvanisation from another such 'investigation' is necessary so that the cause isn't lost.

[Drummond]

No he didn't; he's to paranoid of lefties hiding under his bed. But I digress, this whole thread is a generalization. "May" and an "inquiry" are by definition a generalization thus the only evidence is at the specific case level. The knee-jerk reaction here is how dare anyone investigate suspicious circumstances in war.

... whereas, YOUR reaction is one of being satisfied that another of these witch-hunts is apparently going to be pursued.

Of course you are.

[Noir]

It's NOT up to a commission. It's up to valid evidence and the accusers.

...yes, evidence that the commission is going to review, to see if there are valid claims to be made.

[Elessar]

And maybe only a handful of the accusations are truthful war crimes, it is up to the commission to locate the war crimes (if any) committed and act accordingly. To that end I support the investigation to both bring war criminals to justice, and clear the names of those who have been wrongly accused.

Again you back off from your previous statements.

Did I not tell you if there was FACT it would be taken seriously?

You are in over your head, Noir.

[Elessar]

...yes, evidence that the commission is going to review, to see if there are valid claims to be made.

After 5 years waiting now from the original inquiry?
Drummond disputed your whines for the Brits.

Go back to video games.

[fj1200]

Yet it is all a typical Liberal ploy to force PC thinking on the masses:

Make assumptions;

Offer condemnation;

Judge with out proof;

Judge without personal experience.

Are you his protector? Gunny has been nastier than me but will
you go after him? Nope...You won't.

I stand my ground.

I don't go after anyone, it's a discussion and one emanating from a nothing story. I see noir expecting soldiers to be held to a standard.


What you see is vets closing ranks. I would not tolerate criminal activity. There's a BIG difference to us what that is and what it is to those who have never been there.

Almost 2k accusations? BS. I served alongside Brits. Royal Marines just don't act like that. They're bigger sticklers for the rules than I am, and that's going some. This is political BS, pure and simple.

The only interesting thing to me is whether this is a normal exercise by the Brits or not. Where do the allegations come from? I can see where you are coming from in being asked to do something and then being judged after the fact. But there are no specifics being offered here where we can say who is right and who is wrong. We had another thread here where 5? British soldiers were being investigated for a war crime of some such; now that was something that could be discussed. (Wish my searching skills were better)

[fj1200]

... whereas, YOUR reaction is one of being satisfied that another of these witch-hunts is apparently going to be pursued.

Of course you are.

If you weren't such a blither idiot it might be fun to talk to you. :) But as it stands your ignorant imagination is just to strong with you.

[Drummond]

If you weren't such a blither idiot it might be fun to talk to you. :) But as it stands your ignorant imagination is just to strong with you.

Then I'll challenge you to some clarity. To be completely clear, then .. do you oppose them ?

If you do .. say so, clearly, in reply to this post.

Or, do you share the Leftie enthusiasm for inventing demonisation attempt after demonisation attempt ?

[Gunny]

I don't go after anyone, it's a discussion and one emanating from a nothing story. I see noir expecting soldiers to be held to a standard.



The only interesting thing to me is whether this is a normal exercise by the Brits or not. Where do the allegations come from? I can see where you are coming from in being asked to do something and then being judged after the fact. But there are no specifics being offered here where we can say who is right and who is wrong. We had another thread here where 5? British soldiers were being investigated for a war crime of some such; now that was something that could be discussed. (Wish my searching skills were better)

You'd have to ask a Brit. If I was to commit a war crime, like desertion in the face of the enemy, I'd be tried by a military court, not a civilian one. If I break a civilian law, THEN I get tried by civilians. Having a bunch of unknowledgeable political boobs judge us is retarded. I need only point to the current CinC to make my case. If that idiot was any dumber he'd have had to go to school for it.

You people think we don't hold our own accountable and my response is you watch too many Oliver Stone movies. You bust the rules in the USMC and your ass is grass. The Brits are less emotional, more stoic, have a cool sense of humor, and WAY more rigid about crap than we are. I'd be more willing to believe US Marines committed 15k war crimes than I would Royal Marines.

This PC sh*t is out of hand.

[fj1200]

You'd have to ask a Brit. If I was to commit a war crime, like desertion in the face of the enemy, I'd be tried by a military court, not a civilian one. If I break a civilian law, THEN I get tried by civilians. Having a bunch of unknowledgeable political boobs judge us is retarded. I need only point to the current CinC to make my case. If that idiot was any dumber he'd have had to go to school for it.

You people think we don't hold our own accountable and my response is you watch too many Oliver Stone movies. You bust the rules in the USMC and your ass is grass. The Brits are less emotional, more stoic, have a cool sense of humor, and WAY more rigid about crap than we are. I'd be more willing to believe US Marines committed 15k war crimes than I would Royal Marines.

This PC sh*t is out of hand.

I would think that would be the case but I don't know. But I don't think desertion is the type of "war crime" they'll be looking at, they specifically mentioned murder. The guy that killed a bunch of people in Iraq?, was he tried by the military?

[fj1200]

Then I'll challenge you to some clarity. To be completely clear, then .. do you oppose them ?

If you do .. say so, clearly, in reply to this post.

Or, do you share the Leftie enthusiasm for inventing demonisation attempt after demonisation attempt ?

WTF is wrong with you? You can't even ask a coherent question, how am I supposed to read your ignorant imagination. If you're asking about the inquiry I don't particularly care what the Brits do.

[Gunny]

I would think that would be the case but I don't know. But I don't think desertion is the type of "war crime" they'll be looking at, they specifically mentioned murder. The guy that killed a bunch of people in Iraq?, was he tried by the military?

My point is what you civvies call "war crimes", we call saving our's or our fellow Marines' asses. If you haven't been there, you have no right to judge.

Y'all like to sit back and judge us, and tell us what we did wrong, but you don't get the simplicity of I never had that luxury. I can look at what went wrong. Sure. As long as I'm alive to do so. Don't happen if I get killed over some bullsh*t rule some chair polisher has tied my hands with. Y'all sit around discussing politics and rules ... go get shot at.

I'm taking you out if I have to shove a tree limb up your ass to do it. Only good enemy is a dead enemy. THEN you might be able to get some chow and few hours of shuteye.

[fj1200]

My point is what you civvies call "war crimes", we call saving our's or our fellow Marines' asses. If you haven't been there, you have no right to judge.

Y'all like to sit back and judge us, and tell us what we did wrong, but you don't get the simplicity of I never had that luxury. I can look at what went wrong. Sure. As long as I'm alive to do so. Don't happen if I get killed over some bullsh*t rule some chair polisher has tied my hands with. Y'all sit around discussing politics and rules ... go get shot at.

I'm taking you out if I have to shove a tree limb up your ass to do it. Only good enemy is a dead enemy. THEN you might be able to get some chow and few hours of shuteye.

I'm only calling a war crime what is typically defined as a war crime.


A war crime (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime) is an act that constitutes a serious violation of the law of war (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_war) that gives rise to individual criminal responsibility.[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime#cite_note-Cassese-1)Examples of war crimes include intentionally killing civilians or prisoners, torture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture), wantonly destroying property, taking hostages (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostage),perfidy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy), rape (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape), using child soldiers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_use_of_children), pillaging (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillaging), declaring that no quarter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_quarter) will be given, and using weapons that cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime#cite_note-2)

What you are referring to I don't think falls anywhere close to war crimes and sounds more like rules of engagement.

[Gunny]

I'm only calling a war crime what is typically defined as a war crime.



What you are referring to I don't think falls anywhere close to war crimes and sounds more like rules of engagement.

Think you really need to explain a war crime to someone who had to memorize the Laws of Land Warfare? So let me ask an (almost) hypothetical question:

Idiot shoots your machine gunner and roommate for 3 years, drops his rifle and throws up his hands. What do you do?

[fj1200]

Think you really need to explain a war crime to someone who had to memorize the Laws of Land Warfare? So let me ask an (almost) hypothetical question:

Idiot shoots your machine gunner and roommate for 3 years, drops his rifle and throws up his hands. What do you do?

I was mostly explaining it to myself. :) And shoot fast?

[Elessar]

I'm only calling a war crime what is typically defined as a war crime.

What you are referring to I don't think falls anywhere close to war crimes and sounds more like rules of engagement.

What do you know about ROE?

You are hardly in a position to judge unless you directly witnessed something.

This is the whole point of retort to Noir's whining.

Gunny is right. If someone did wrong, the respective service will take care of it.

Outsiders who never served, such as you and young Noir, have no concept at all.

[fj1200]

What do you know about ROE?

You are hardly in a position to judge unless you directly witnessed something.

This is the whole point of retort to Noir's whining.

Gunny is right. If someone did wrong, the respective service will take care of it.

Outsiders who never served, such as you and young Noir, have no concept at all.

I can discuss the difference between ROE and WC without having to talk down to anyone who disagrees with me because they share a different viewpoint. And in cases like the OP someone is going to judge who did not directly witness the event; people judge all the time who "have no concept at all." And why do you keep insisting that I have some bug disagreement with Gunny? He and I can discuss like adults.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I can discuss the difference between ROE and WC without having to talk down to anyone who disagrees with me because they share a different viewpoint. And in cases like the OP someone is going to judge who did not directly witness the event; people judge all the time who "have no concept at all." And why do you keep insisting that I have some bug disagreement with Gunny? He and I can discuss like adults.



And why do you keep insisting that I have some bug disagreement with Gunny? He and I can discuss like adults .
^^^^^^^^ Because your great fear of Gunny causes you to give a measure of respect, yet he (to his credit)actually shows greater control when blasting you , I suppose because he sees you as a child and a civvie ignoramus or something to be pitied IMHO.
We that your arrogant ass attempts to belittle as beneath your intelligence level respond to you as you deserve in regards to the replies you give us.
You are a liar, a snob, a fool, a lib and a deliberate jackass to most members in your replies.
Your arrogant attitude and consistent spinning, lying and/or running away when beaten speaks for itself.
As well as who you fear and show some measure of respect to.
You do your troll crap because you can hide behind that screen but if face to face you'd quiver and cry like a baby. -Tyr

[jimnyc]

My belief is that if it happens in the military, it should be a military court handling the process. Especially when it comes to judging actions of war, and those actions based on "rules" books. These simply aren't things that regular civilians should be handling in my opinion, and even less so any type of politicians. I prefer the military courts here in the US as those guys/gals have lived and breathed the rules their entire careers, and sure as hell don't seem to take the jobs lightly.

[aboutime]

From The Associated Press 2 January 2016:
--------------------------------------------------------------
The head of an official British investigation into alleged abuses during the Iraq War says that U.K. soldiers may face prosecution for crimes including murder. Mark Warwick said the inquiry is probing "lots of significant cases" and officials will discuss whether they meet the war crimes threshold.
--------------------------------------------------------------

article (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_BRITAIN_IRAQ?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-01-02-07-16-10)


What a proven idiot, and hypocrite you are! Can't spread enough bad, hateful news about police officers, so you hastily, and happily switch to your second favorite hatred...as in members of the military.
You sound like nothing that takes place at any time, during the history of the World will ever satisfy you because YOU DIDN'T HAVE A VOICE in deciding how much hatred you can SPEW.
You should really be ashamed of your endless hatred. But then. That hatred only makes you the hated.

[Noir]

My belief is that if it happens in the military, it should be a military court handling the process. Especially when it comes to judging actions of war, and those actions based on "rules" books. These simply aren't things that regular civilians should be handling in my opinion, and even less so any type of politicians. I prefer the military courts here in the US as those guys/gals have lived and breathed the rules their entire careers, and sure as hell don't seem to take the jobs lightly.

Im sure you can understand this from the perspective of the 'victim' as well - The old quip 'we duly held an investigation into ourselves and found we did nothing wrong' rarely looks good, even if nothing wrong was done.

[jimnyc]

Im sure you can understand this from the perspective of the 'victim' as well - The old quip 'we duly held an investigation into ourselves and found we did nothing wrong' rarely looks good, even if nothing wrong was done.

Perhaps if these courts had a history of shitty proceedings, I dunno. Here in the states, they are tough as hell. And if there's evidence that you "murdered" someone, they ain't going lightly.

Also, as far as an investigation into theirselves - a court IS, in jury trials, supposed to be judged by a jury of their peers. I would prefer those with the most in depth knowledge of the rules of warfare. For all I know this will be just an inquiry, and forwarded to a military court for prosecution. I just think the court process for soldiers charged with any type of crime while in service, should be held by the military courts. I can't think of many reasons why they wouldn't here in the states, but I admittedly know absolutely not a whole lot about military courts. What I do know, is those that are found guilty of major crimes will be screwed in the butt, and likely seeing Leavenworth or the equivalent for a long time, if not life.

[Elessar]

I can discuss the difference between ROE and WC without having to talk down to anyone who disagrees with me because they share a different viewpoint. And in cases like the OP someone is going to judge who did not directly witness the event; people judge all the time who "have no concept at all." And why do you keep insisting that I have some bug disagreement with Gunny? He and I can discuss like adults.

Plain and simple - you come across as arrogant and ignorant.

[Elessar]

I would think that would be the case but I don't know. But I don't think desertion is the type of "war crime" they'll be looking at, they specifically mentioned murder. The guy that killed a bunch of people in Iraq?, was he tried by the military?
You and Noir both shimmy back when confronted with FACT.

No opinions, no suppositions, but FACT makes you defensive.

[Gunny]

I can discuss the difference between ROE and WC without having to talk down to anyone who disagrees with me because they share a different viewpoint. And in cases like the OP someone is going to judge who did not directly witness the event; people judge all the time who "have no concept at all." And why do you keep insisting that I have some bug disagreement with Gunny? He and I can discuss like adults.

I agree with you both. You can discuss. I agree with a fellow vet because until someone's aiming a gun at you, you have no idea what you're going to do. And if you haven't been in that position, you have NO idea what it's like. That's why as much as I dislike cops, I'm not all over their butts about their decisions.

You react or act according to training. Not who's going to tell you what you did wrong the next gay. I had a Sergeant Major for THAT crap.

[indago]

What a proven idiot, and hypocrite you are... (and other and sundry aberrations, ramifications, fixations, lamentations, hallucinations, and incantations)

SNIVELS (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?49744-The-aboutime-and-Gunny-Snivel-Thread&p=735589#post735589)

Have to start calling you SNIVELS...

[aboutime]

SNIVELS (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?49744-The-aboutime-and-Gunny-Snivel-Thread&p=735589#post735589)

Have to start calling you SNIVELS...


Call me whatever you like, whenever you like. But...you cannot disprove the facts I have stated about you.

Your SNIVEL middle name has to be Dumbass.

[Gunny]

You and Noir both shimmy back when confronted with FACT.

No opinions, no suppositions, but FACT makes you defensive.

I keep trying. They just don't get it. I don't know how many hours you have on ROE, UCMJ, Code of Conduct, and SOFA but I think I've got as many hours on that crap as I have sea time. You know as well as I do the second that first round goes down range the best laid plans of mice and men just hit the shitter.

And I want to be judged by my peers, not some idealistic civilian who thinks everything goes perfectly according to plan. I don't want to be judged by someone that watched the Gulf War on CNN but they weren't in than 46 when when the ramp was dropped and the word go was given.

[Drummond]

WTF is wrong with you? You can't even ask a coherent question, how am I supposed to read your ignorant imagination. If you're asking about the inquiry I don't particularly care what the Brits do.

I was clear enough ...

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?53316-War-Crimes-Inquiry&p=790171#post790171

Dodging and evasion is your response. None of the clarity I asked you for, and you certainly won't commit yourself to an 'anti' position when it comes to opening up Inquiry after Inquiry.

Of course not. Lefties WANT THEM. As many as it'll take to demonise and discredit.

You refuse to divert away from your own Leftieism by even a millimetre .. as expected.

QED.

[Elessar]

I keep trying. They just don't get it. I don't know how many hours you have on ROE, UCMJ, Code of Conduct, and SOFA but I think I've got as many hours on that crap as I have sea time. You know as well as I do the second that first round goes down range the best laid plans of mice and men just hit the shitter.

And I want to be judged by my peers, not some idealistic civilian who thinks everything goes perfectly according to plan. I don't want to be judged by someone that watched the Gulf War on CNN but they weren't in than 46 when when the ramp was dropped and the word go was given.

Why don't these chicken-shits get that message?

They poop their pants if they had to do what you and the other combat arms vets have done.

Their opinions are worthless.

[Elessar]

I'm only calling a war crime what is typically defined as a war crime.
What you are referring to I don't think falls anywhere close to war crimes and sounds more like rules of engagement.

Gawd, You are so stupid and blind.

Listen to Gunny and not the liberal ideals in your thick skull.

[Gunny]

Why don't these chicken-shits get that message?

They poop their pants if they had to do what you and the other combat arms vets have done.

Their opinions are worthless.


Gawd, You are so stupid and blind.

Listen to Gunny and not the liberal ideals in your thick skull.

Old saying I just think some take it too far and don't say a word .... If you've been there, I don't have to explain. If you haven't, no explanation in the world will work. FJ doesn't actually bother me. People like Noir do. FJ will actually listen to what you have to say if you make a reasonable argument. Noir's head is so far up his ass it'd take him two weeks to dig to daylight.

What I totally agree with is I get sick of hearing people sitting around being Chatty Cathy's about something they know nothing about.

And I didn't know the whole story about Benghazi until tonight. And dumbass shitheads are going to vote for that incompetent bitch? I impressed myself though. I was holding a baby and didn't lose my temper. Guess they need to include one of those in your deuce gear. Baby, 1 each. :laugh:

[Perianne]

Not that it compares to the military world, but I think maybe it does in a way.

I live in the medical world. It is a world so foreign to others that they actually can't even see how little they know about how things work.

Even if you have been a patient in a hospital 100 times, you only get to glimpse a small portion of how things actually work. I very strongly suspect that the military world is the same way. Unless you have lived the life, you are in no position to understand and especially to judge.

Those are my thoughts on the matter.

[indago]

Not that it compares to the military world, but I think maybe it does in a way.

I live in the medical world. It is a world so foreign to others that they actually can't even see how little they know about how things work.

Even if you have been a patient in a hospital 100 times, you only get to glimpse a small portion of how things actually work. I very strongly suspect that the military world is the same way. Unless you have lived the life, you are in no position to understand and especially to judge.

Those are my thoughts on the matter.

That would be true of just about any profession. Some look at Perry Mason on TV and think that is how the legal profession works. But then, that's why there are "professionals". If they really work at their profession, they will be successful.

[Drummond]

Old saying I just think some take it too far and don't say a word .... If you've been there, I don't have to explain. If you haven't, no explanation in the world will work. FJ doesn't actually bother me. People like Noir do. FJ will actually listen to what you have to say if you make a reasonable argument. Noir's head is so far up his ass it'd take him two weeks to dig to daylight.

What I totally agree with is I get sick of hearing people sitting around being Chatty Cathy's about something they know nothing about.

And I didn't know the whole story about Benghazi until tonight. And dumbass shitheads are going to vote for that incompetent bitch? I impressed myself though. I was holding a baby and didn't lose my temper. Guess they need to include one of those in your deuce gear. Baby, 1 each. :laugh:

Noir's hopeless ... agreed.

FJ is is own brand of 'hopeless'. He 'listens' to arguments, in that he uses a yardstick of pedantry to gauge his own responses .. IF he can, subject to his own belief preferences. If you stray outside them, AND, he can't meet your arguments with counter-arguments, then the abuse starts. The manipulation of quotes has been discussed and, hopefully, now dealt with. The sheer abusiveness .. this continues.

FJ is agenda-driven, undoubtedly. For example, I can't pin him down (you can see for yourself that I have tried) to any position which varies from the British Left's enthusiasm for Inquiries, which our Left KEEPS ON asking for, to continue to demonise military opposition against terrorism hotspots.

So, no. FJ doesn't 'listen' in any even-handed way. If you think otherwise, then you're just wrong.

[Noir]

Its great how many insults can be thrown your way for holding an opinion as controversial as 'if a crime is alleged then it should be investigated' :laugh:

[fj1200]

^^^^^^^^ Because your great fear of Gunny ...

I have no fear of Gunny. Quite simply he is not an idiot like you.


Plain and simple - you come across as arrogant and ignorant.

Back atcha. Though I do try not to make ignorant assumptions about posters as you do.


You and Noir both shimmy back when confronted with FACT.

No opinions, no suppositions, but FACT makes you defensive.

Which FACT would that be?

[fj1200]

Of course not. Lefties WANT THEM. As many as it'll take to demonise and discredit.

Thanks for proving I'm not a leftie you blithering idiot. But I digress, you ask stupid questions with ignorant assumptions. :)

[fj1200]

I agree with you both. You can discuss. I agree with a fellow vet because until someone's aiming a gun at you, you have no idea what you're going to do. And if you haven't been in that position, you have NO idea what it's like. That's why as much as I dislike cops, I'm not all over their butts about their decisions.

You react or act according to training. Not who's going to tell you what you did wrong the next gay. I had a Sergeant Major for THAT crap.

That's all this is, a discussion.


I keep trying. They just don't get it. I don't know how many hours you have on ROE, UCMJ, Code of Conduct, and SOFA but I think I've got as many hours on that crap as I have sea time. You know as well as I do the second that first round goes down range the best laid plans of mice and men just hit the shitter.

And I want to be judged by my peers, not some idealistic civilian who thinks everything goes perfectly according to plan. I don't want to be judged by someone that watched the Gulf War on CNN but they weren't in than 46 when when the ramp was dropped and the word go was given.

Isn't that always the case? Court Martial proceedings?

[fj1200]

Gawd, You are so stupid and blind.

Listen to Gunny and not the liberal ideals in your thick skull.

Considering you revel in ignorance I'll just leave this here. :)


FJ will actually listen to what you have to say if you make a reasonable argument.


So, no. FJ doesn't 'listen' in any even-handed way. If you think otherwise, then you're just wrong.

You're just a frickin' idiot. So many times I've asked you to prove all my supposed big government, anti-Constitutional, anti-liberty leanings and you just slink away like the coward you are. Usually after you make some big-government argument. :laugh:

[jimnyc]

Its great how many insults can be thrown your way for holding an opinion as controversial as 'if a crime is alleged then it should be investigated' :laugh:

I believe you could have ignored such replies, and took the time to reply to those who didn't insult in their posts, like mine.

[Drummond]

Its great how many insults can be thrown your way for holding an opinion as controversial as 'if a crime is alleged then it should be investigated' :laugh:

And it's 'amazing' at just how much mudslinging the Left is determined to do, to try and render toxic any future likelihood of meaningfully fighting Muslim terrorists !

If you had your way, British soldiers would be so frightened of transgressing any PC directives that they'd be rendered useless at doing their job. Which is, of course, EXACTLY THE SORT OF EFFECT YOU'RE AIMING FOR.

Chilcot has taken too long to produce the outcome you'd have hoped for. Impetus has therefore been lost, hasn't it ? So, along comes another excuse for an Inquiry !

If this one fails you, you'll try for another .. and so on. Whatever it takes for you to come to the assistance of - wait for it -

... THE ENEMY ...

Try to comprehend that you ARE their enemy, too. Or does Leftie PC brainwashing not permit such thinking ?

[Noir]

I believe you could have ignored such replies, and took the time to reply to those who didn't insult in their posts, like mine.

Why ignore insults when you can enjoy them? :salute:

For your own comments I've really nothing more to add to the convo, and you didn't ask a question, so I didn't reply.

[Noir]

Drummond, do you think that if an allegation of a crime is made, that allegation should be investigated?

[Drummond]

You're just a frickin' idiot. So many times I've asked you to prove all my supposed big government, anti-Constitutional, anti-liberty leanings and you just slink away like the coward you are. Usually after you make some big-government argument. :laugh:

Ah, yet more abuse. Look, FJ, we both know how weak your arguments are. But can't you be a little more inventive in trying to obscure that fact ?

If you're a Thatcherite, then you take the position of approving of Big Government measures as and when they're at all appropriate. So, are you finally admitting that you AREN'T a 'Thatcherite' ?

That you're a fraud is beyond question. Exactly what type of fraud is theoretically questionable, or WOULD be, if I didn't know that your biases lean to the Left. You're obviously broadly in agreement with Noir, when it comes to being content about Inquiry after Inquiry against British troops, or British political decision-making, that could lead to Muslim terrorists being effectively fought against.

You also fight tooth and nail to 'humanise' perceptions of terrorists, seeing phantom 'humanity' where none exists.

Each of these positions is fully in line with Leftie thinking.

And, like any Leftie, you'll never, but never, move a millimetre away from them. You're locked into that thinking. As all Lefties are.

[fj1200]

Ah, yet more abuse. Look, FJ, we both know how weak your arguments are. But can't you be a little more inventive in trying to obscure that fact ?

As I thought. You're too stupid to recognize that you're stupid. I've answered you over and over and you go right back to being an ignorant moron who ignores what proves him wrong and doesn't understand. It goes well with you being a lying sack and a hypocrite. There are hundreds of other threads you've sprinted away from that you won't respond to because I've proved you an idiot. :)

[Drummond]

As I thought. You're too stupid to recognize that you're stupid. I've answered you over and over and you go right back to being an ignorant moron who ignores what proves him wrong and doesn't understand. It goes well with you being a lying sack and a hypocrite. There are hundreds of other threads you've sprinted away from that you won't respond to because I've proved you an idiot. :)

Abuse and yet more abuse. Don't you find your own lack of originality a tad tiresome ?

I certainly do !

[Drummond]

Drummond, do you think that if an allegation of a crime is made, that allegation should be investigated?

How many such allegations will it take, for you to hope that even ONE might succeed ?

The real point is that the Left will ensure that they continue. Just as Piers Morgan never apologised for his .. so, more generally, others starting them will be equally as unapologetic.

An agenda is involved, of course. It cannot be abandoned .. can it ?

[fj1200]

Abuse and yet more abuse. Don't you find your own lack of originality a tad tiresome ?

I certainly do !

:laugh: Coming from the moron who constantly bleats leftie and thatcherite. :laugh: Boy, you're dumb. I can easily not call you an idiot but you can't keep from whining because you apparently lack the capacity to engage in intelligent discussion.

[jimnyc]

Thanks for proving I'm not a leftie you blithering idiot. But I digress, you ask stupid questions with ignorant assumptions. :)

Didn't you just "thank" Noir in a post talking about how others insult him?

[jimnyc]

Why ignore insults when you can enjoy them? :salute:

For your own comments I've really nothing more to add to the convo, and you didn't ask a question, so I didn't reply.

I counted the first 3 pages and you replied no less than 6 times to posts that had no questions in them. And that's cool and all, but one shouldn't be so quick to condemn the entire participants of a thread when that's not reality. I guess my few lame posts broke the internet! :)

[jimnyc]

:laugh: Coming from the moron who constantly bleats leftie and thatcherite. :laugh: Boy, you're dumb. I can easily not call you an idiot but you can't keep from whining because you apparently lack the capacity to engage in intelligent discussion.

:dunno:

[Black Diamond]

Its great how many insults can be thrown your way for holding an opinion as controversial as 'if a crime is alleged then it should be investigated' :laugh:

That's not why people are insulting you, but you already knew that.

[Gunny]

Not that it compares to the military world, but I think maybe it does in a way.

I live in the medical world. It is a world so foreign to others that they actually can't even see how little they know about how things work.

Even if you have been a patient in a hospital 100 times, you only get to glimpse a small portion of how things actually work. I very strongly suspect that the military world is the same way. Unless you have lived the life, you are in no position to understand and especially to judge.

Those are my thoughts on the matter.

It isn't about comparisons. The last place you want ME is in an operating room. I'd probably just break everything.:laugh: There are lots of things I know nothing about and I usually find someone that does rather than try and play expert at something someone else does. Would you want to go into a military court martial being judged by a bunch of grunts for something you did in an operating room? Or perhaps some know-nothing political board that never had to make a life or death decision? I'm going to go out on a limb here and say your answer would be no.

It's about being judged by your peers to me.

[Elessar]

I have no fear of Gunny. Quite simply he is not an idiot like you.

Which FACT would that be?

Show the FACT, then.

Simple enough. Show the FACT that support the claims of war crimes.
Not ignorant rumors and suppositions. These combat Vets will back up
FACT because of their honor. Until you and Noir can show FACT
You are pissing down peoples backs and calling it rain.

(Tapping my toes, waiting)

[Elessar]

Considering you revel in ignorance I'll just leave this here. :)

You're just a frickin' idiot. So many times I've asked you to prove all my supposed big government, anti-Constitutional, anti-liberty leanings and you just slink away like the coward you are. Usually after you make some big-government argument. :laugh:

I am no coward or idiot, Fool.

I ask you to back up your bravado, and you don't.

What a dillweed.

[Elessar]

Drummond, do you think that if an allegation of a crime is made, that allegation should be investigated?

Allegation is a liberals over-used term.

State FACT and not rumor or opinion.

You cannot.

[Noir]

How many such allegations will it take, for you to hope that even ONE might succeed ?

The real point is that the Left will ensure that they continue. Just as Piers Morgan never apologised for his .. so, more generally, others starting them will be equally as unapologetic.

An agenda is involved, of course. It cannot be abandoned .. can it ?

I don't hope any succeed, because I hope all accusations are false and that no war crimes have been committed.

As as for my question to you, do you believe if a crime is alleged that allegation should be investigated?

[Black Diamond]

Drummond, do you think that if an allegation of a crime is made, that allegation should be investigated?

Noir blew up the World Trade Center.

Should this allegation be investigated?

[Elessar]

Noir blew up the World Trade Center.

Should this allegation be investigated?

Good comparison...Did FJ help?

Well, then investigate the rumor!:laugh:

[Gunny]

That's all this is, a discussion.



Isn't that always the case? Court Martial proceedings?

Sure. I'm judged for my conduct as a Marine BY Marines. Not by Noir.

[Noir]

Noir blew up the World Trade Center.

Should this allegation be investigated?

I think you have me confused for Drummond.
But you're welcome to spend your time contacting your authorities to make said allegation.

[Gunny]

I don't hope any succeed, because I hope all accusations are false and that no war crimes have been committed.

As as for my question to you, do you believe if a crime is alleged that allegation should be investigated?

Point is, where does this end? You're not going to get a lot of empathy here from people who still believe in the 4th Amendment.

[Noir]

Point is, where does this end? You're not going to get a lot of empathy here from people who still believe in the 4th Amendment.

Hiw does investigating an alleged crime snub the 4th Amendment?

[Gunny]

Hiw does investigating an alleged crime snub the 4th Amendment?

You're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. In practice, you are presumed guilty until proven innocent. No matter what jerkoff makes an accusation for whatever reason.

So, I do my job in the field, as trained, come home, and 6 years later I'm answering to some fat-ass slob who's never been 3 miles from home on some baseless accusations by idiot leftwingers? I believe 15k war crimes were committed by British troops like I believe John Kerry was a war hero. He managed to have every Oliver Stone moment in a matter of about 4 months. :rolleyes:

I'd be tossing paperwork into the shredder.

[Elessar]

I think you have me confused for Drummond.
But you're welcome to spend your time contacting your authorities to make said allegation.

Noir, how ignorant can you be?

You whine and follow assumptions, not FACT.

Show us the FACT, and you would be believable.

[Noir]

You're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. In practice, you are presumed guilty until proven innocent. No matter what jerkoff makes an accusation for whatever reason.

So, I do my job in the field, as trained, come home, and 6 years later I'm answering to some fat-ass slob who's never been 3 miles from home on some baseless accusations by idiot leftwingers? I believe 15k war crimes were committed by British troops like I believe John Kerry was a war hero. He managed to have every Oliver Stone moment in a matter of about 4 months. :rolleyes:

I'd be tossing paperwork into the shredder.

Has anyone stated that those alleged of any crimes are guilty?

[Elessar]

Hiw does investigating an alleged crime snub the 4th Amendment?

The word alleged is horse shit. It is an accusation, not a FACT.

Shit...clear your ears, Little Boy.

You must be bored today to keep up your attention seeking Liberal whines!:lame2:

[Gunny]

Noir, how ignorant can you be?

You whine and follow assumptions, not FACT.

Show us the FACT, and you would be believable.

Oh give him a few. He'll be telling you how to run that cutter and what you can and can't do to smugglers in Bayliners with twin Mercs and if you shoot their asses you need to spend 6 years of your life on hold waiting on some dipstick to decide if you're going to be free or not for doing your duty. :rolleyes:

[Drummond]

:laugh: Coming from the moron who constantly bleats leftie and thatcherite. :laugh: Boy, you're dumb. I can easily not call you an idiot but you can't keep from whining because you apparently lack the capacity to engage in intelligent discussion.

You want intelligent discussion ? OK, try this out. You'd get a lot further with 'intelligent discussion' if you didn't take up a fundamentally dishonest position.

You're a Thatcherite ? OK, then you've no honest objection to make against Big Government methodology. While she wasn't a fan of it, she nonetheless used it as a tool whenever she saw any practical advantage to it. If YOUR position differs from that, then you've lied about your Thatcherism.

If it doesn't ... then, you've lied about being staunchly anti-Big Government. This in turn defies your so-called 'Libertarian' bona fides.

However this is viewed, inconsistencies are revealed about you. YOU CANNOT BE GENUINE.

So here's your choice. Stop lying about yourself, do the intelligent thing, and take up a position about yourself that makes your posting at least somewhat believable. OR, just try to bluster your way out of trouble with just another round of abuse.

What do you choose ? A path towards intelligent discussion, so that conversations can usefully move forward ? Or, the stupid path ... abuse instead of discussion, lies instead of believability ?

And if you'll admit the way your stances keep veering off towards a Leftie-friendly mindset (this explaining why you so rarely even TRY to initiate Conservative opinion-making) .. so much the better.

Cue some more abuse ? H'mm .. ??

[Drummond]

I think you have me confused for Drummond.
But you're welcome to spend your time contacting your authorities to make said allegation.

???????????

Why would I be thought to be responsible for any attack against the World Trade Centre ?

Perhaps you're helping to prove how mere allegations are hogwash, Noir ? And if they're ever NOT .. then, Noir, EVIDENCE gives them credence.

This may not make much 'Leftie' sense. But it happens to be true.

[Elessar]

Oh give him a few. He'll be telling you how to run that cutter and what you can and can't do to smugglers in Bayliners with twin Mercs and if you shoot their asses you need to spend 6 years of your life on hold waiting on some dipstick to decide if you're going to be free or not for doing your duty. :rolleyes:

Based on this thread, I can see that happening.:laugh:

Neither one has a clue in reality.....Noir or FJ...

And that was not an insult. Just a direct observation.

[fj1200]

Didn't you just "thank" Noir in a post talking about how others insult him?

Yes, I did. This thing is completely silly.


:dunno:

Truthful statements. :)

[fj1200]

Show the FACT, then.

Simple enough. Show the FACT that support the claims of war crimes.
Not ignorant rumors and suppositions. These combat Vets will back up
FACT because of their honor. Until you and Noir can show FACT
You are pissing down peoples backs and calling it rain.

(Tapping my toes, waiting)

Umm, you stated that "facts make me defensive." Are you saying your statement isn't true? As I stated earlier, there is no fact in this thread only investigations.


I am no coward or idiot, Fool.

I ask you to back up your bravado, and you don't.

What a dillweed.

Point of order, I called you neither. I called you ignorant because you apparently like to make up positions for me out of ignorance. And how do you suggest I back up my bravado?

[fj1200]

You want intelligent discussion ? OK, try this out. You'd get a lot further with 'intelligent discussion' if you didn't take up a fundamentally dishonest position.

I do. You're not capable. You can't even make it one paragraph without resorting to your ignorant imagination.

[fj1200]

Neither one has a clue in reality.....Noir or FJ...

Exactly what do I have no clue about?

[Drummond]

Truthful statements. :)

Nope. Gratuitous abuse.

[Drummond]

I do. You're not capable. You can't even make it one paragraph without resorting to your ignorant imagination.

A bit light on the abuse, for once ! Only the one example, in THREE sentences !!! Does this constitute progress ??:eek::eek:

Definitely on the 'minus' side .. you ducked everything else in the process. What a surprise ...

Lefties do that, of course. Non-acknowledgment of any truths that aren't convenient to any ongoing agenda.

[Elessar]

Umm, you stated that "facts make me defensive." Are you saying your statement isn't true? As I stated earlier, there is no fact in this thread only investigations.

Point of order, I called you neither. I called you ignorant because you apparently like to make up positions for me out of ignorance. And how do you suggest I back up my bravado?

Simple:

Back up what you say, not just bloviate.

..and I said the same. No FACT, just assumptions and accusations.
Liberals are good at running the underlined into 'allegation', then
try to twist it to Truth.

[Elessar]

Exactly what do I have no clue about?

Reality and honesty for a start.

[Gunny]

Exactly what do I have no clue about?

I'll give you being more level-neaded than Noir, but I'm not sure if that's a compliment.

The point is, I see people on here constantly telling others about what they do and sitting in judgement of them. And they never have a clue. I'm also not getting into the middle of one of your little wars with others. If they don't like you, tough. If you don't like them, tough. At the risk of repeating myself again, it doesn't do anything for the rest of us when a threads turns to a personal pissing contest. We want to post too.

Can't y'all just have a "We Hate FJ" thread somewhere? :laugh:

[Gunny]

I'll give you being more level-neaded than Noir, but I'm not sure if that's a compliment.

The point is, I see people on here constantly telling others about what they do and sitting in judgement of them. And they never have a clue. I'm also not getting into the middle of one of your little wars with others. If they don't like you, tough. If you don't like them, tough. At the risk of repeating myself again, it doesn't do anything for the rest of us when a threads turns to a personal pissing contest. We want to post too.

Can't y'all just have a "We Hate FJ" thread somewhere? :laugh:

I'll also say this: you need yo quit trying to bullshit the bullshitter. You blame others, but you're as much to blame. You poke a dog with a stick long enough and after awhile, you don't need the stick. All it's got to do is see you. I comprehend the nuances here, but you ain't exactly innocent.

[Drummond]

I'll give you being more level-neaded than Noir, but I'm not sure if that's a compliment.

The point is, I see people on here constantly telling others about what they do and sitting in judgement of them. And they never have a clue. I'm also not getting into the middle of one of your little wars with others. If they don't like you, tough. If you don't like them, tough. At the risk of repeating myself again, it doesn't do anything for the rest of us when a threads turns to a personal pissing contest. We want to post too.

Can't y'all just have a "We Hate FJ" thread somewhere? :laugh:

Well, his posting honestly would be better - it'd be welcome progress ! But in the absence of that, well, it's an idea !!! ;)

[fj1200]

Non-acknowledgment of any truths that aren't convenient to any ongoing agenda.

You'll pretty much whine about anything.


Simple:

Back up what you say, not just bloviate.

..and I said the same. No FACT, just assumptions and accusations.
Liberals are good at running the underlined into 'allegation', then
try to twist it to Truth.

I haven't accused anyone of anything. The only factual thing in this thread is an inquiry. An inquiry that will likely turn out 99% nothing; and no I have nothing to back that up other than opinion.

Way to bleat out "liberal" again though.


Reality and honesty for a start.

Well that was a whole steaming pile of nothing.


Can't y'all just have a "We Hate FJ" thread somewhere? :laugh:

Trolls can't keep themselves to one thing. :eek:


I'll also say this: you need yo quit trying to bullshit the bullshitter. You blame others, but you're as much to blame. You poke a dog with a stick long enough and after awhile, you don't need the stick. All it's got to do is see you. I comprehend the nuances here, but you ain't exactly innocent.

Nope, I'm not perfect. But could you show me where I went wrong in the "church, why go" thread. :)


Well, his posting honestly would be better - it'd be welcome progress ! But in the absence of that, well, it's an idea !!! ;)

I slap you around with honesty almost every day. If only you were smart enough to recognize it.

[Gunny]

You'll pretty much whine about anything.



I haven't accused anyone of anything. The only factual thing in this thread is an inquiry. An inquiry that will likely turn out 99% nothing; and no I have nothing to back that up other than opinion.

Way to bleat out "liberal" again though.



Well that was a whole steaming pile of nothing.



Trolls can't keep themselves to one thing. :eek:



Nope, I'm not perfect. But could you show me where I went wrong in the "church, why go" thread. :)



I slap you around with honesty almost every day. If only you were smart enough to recognize it.

Probably not. One. I don't really care and you're not the one that puts people in the middle of stuff. If I disagree with you I say so. I was speaking in general based on your behavior, nothing specific. If you've pad attention, I've run my mouth dry trying to tell Drummond to quit taking your bait. I just wish y'all wouldn't do it in every damned thread.

Back on topic, there are times when you look at the stupid civilian in charge and say "Fuck YOU". That's what happened at Beghazi. Dumbass spooks telling the military to stand down to save their own worthless hides. And you have to admit, the military was fully represented when they violated a direct order and grabbed their gear. Too bad they didn't have any support.

Sometimes you just do what's right. I ain't sitting around listening to people under direct fire cry for help because some wuss wants to protects his own delicate chicken ass. You want to try me for it later, go right ahead. But allow me to be tried by my peers, not some know-nothing politician.

That jarhead named OZ had his arm hanging by a tendon and still shooting. Hard fucking Corps.

[fj1200]

Back on topic, there are times when you look at the stupid civilian in charge and say "Fuck YOU". That's what happened at Beghazi. Dumbass spooks telling the military to stand down to save their own worthless hides. And you have to admit, the military was fully represented when they violated a direct order and grabbed their gear. Too bad they didn't have any support.

Sometimes you just do what's right. I ain't sitting around listening to people under direct fire cry for help because some wuss wants to protects his own delicate chicken ass. You want to try me for it later, go right ahead. But allow me to be tried by my peers, not some know-nothing politician.

That jarhead named OZ had his arm hanging by a tendon and still shooting. Hard fucking Corps.

I kept remembering a rather vigorous thread that had to do with some Royal Marines being arrested and it I finally found it but I couldn't find if there had been any more recent news:

7 Royal Marines Arrested for doing their Job. (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?37308-7-Royal-Marines-Arrested-for-doing-their-Job)
I also found this that says Marines would be tried by their peers.


A ROYAL Marine has been found guilty of murdering a captive Afghan insurgent by a board of military officers.

Read more: http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Plymouth-Royal-Marine-guilty-Afghanistan-murder/story-20053675-detail/story.html#ixzz3wKsasD00

[Drummond]

I kept remembering a rather vigorous thread that had to do with some Royal Marines being arrested and it I finally found it but I couldn't find if there had been any more recent news:

7 Royal Marines Arrested for doing their Job. (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?37308-7-Royal-Marines-Arrested-for-doing-their-Job)


I also found this that says Marines would be tried by their peers.

Oh, so you studied the Plymouth Herald's link in some detail ? Yet, you 'failed' to thumb down the page sufficiently, it seems.

Here's some of what you've somehow managed to omit to post from your link ... 'an oversight', FJ .. detail, and depth, that the Left prefers not to scrutinise ?

Take another look ....

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Plymouth-Royal-Marine-guilty-Afghanistan-murder/story-20053675-detail/story.html#11

I've split the text up into paragraphs, to try and make it easier reading ...


VETERAN: 'UNFAIR TO JUDGE MURDER MARINE IN THE SAME WAY AS CIVILIAN'

A COMMANDO war veteran has said it is “totally unfair” to judge the Royal Marine who murdered an Afghan insurgent in the “cold light of day”.

Speaking anonymously, he described fighting in conflict as “dehumanising” and said soldiers face putting “barriers” up as a mechanism to “cope” with the horrors of war. Having himself fought on the frontline he said: “I think it is totally unfair to judge this man in the cold light of day. He is being judged in the same way you would a civilian.

Yes it is outrageous but war is a very de-humanising event. “You have to de-humanise yourself to cope with what you see and what you do. You are being trained to kill people which is not what a normal human being is expected to do coupled with the fact you’re under fire, you’re fearing for your own life and the lives of your colleagues. “When you go to war you are fighting for the man alongside you, Queen and Country is all very well but in reality you are fighting for the bloke next door to you and vice versa so when you’re in that position 24-7 you have to put a barrier up and dehumanise yourself to deal with what you are expected to face.”

Speaking about the case, in which Marines B and C were cleared of murder, the veteran said: “I think it’s totally unfair to judge them in a court room by people who have never been in that position. When these men are at war they have adrenaline pumping around your body day after day for months, they are on adrenaline, it’s like a drug. Your judgement will be called into question, it’s bound to be. Some people cope with it some people don’t and they are being judged in a cold sober courtroom with a total absence of adrenaline.

“You have media commentators saying it’s ‘terrible’ but a couple of hours before the incident that bloke was probably trying to kill them. It doesn’t justify what he did but it does go someway to explain why people do the things they do. “The only way you can cope with the day to day events of a war situation is to dehumanise yourself. When you do that you’re doing things that ordinarily wouldn’t be acceptable. “The things they see in their every day life are things a normal human being would never see and they are seeing it day after day, bits of body, dead children.”

I doubt that Noir will have any interest in acknowledging any of this. As for you, FJ .. you've already ignored it. How come .. ?

[Gunny]

Oh, so you studied the Plymouth Herald's link in some detail ? Yet, you 'failed' to thumb down the page sufficiently, it seems.

Here's some of what you've somehow managed to omit to post from your link ... 'an oversight', FJ .. detail, and depth, that the Left prefers not to scrutinise ?

Take another look ....

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Plymouth-Royal-Marine-guilty-Afghanistan-murder/story-20053675-detail/story.html#11

I've split the text up into paragraphs, to try and make it easier reading ...



I doubt that Noir will have any interest in acknowledging any of this. As for you, FJ .. you've already ignored it. How come .. ?

I'd have helped.

[fj1200]

Oh, so you studied the Plymouth Herald's link in some detail ? Yet, you 'failed' to thumb down the page sufficiently, it seems.

Here's some of what you've somehow managed to omit to post from your link ... 'an oversight', FJ .. detail, and depth, that the Left prefers not to scrutinise ?

Take another look ....

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Plymouth-Royal-Marine-guilty-Afghanistan-murder/story-20053675-detail/story.html#11

I've split the text up into paragraphs, to try and make it easier reading ...

I doubt that Noir will have any interest in acknowledging any of this. As for you, FJ .. you've already ignored it. How come .. ?

Do try to keep up with the program. Gunny said he wanted to be judged by his peers, I went looking and it appears that this British soldier was judged by his peers. That was the point of the link. You spend way to much time deciding what I believe based on what I don't post when I've made thousands of posts here that you completely ignore... because you don't understand them and they prove you wrong.

[Elessar]

I doubt that Noir will have any interest in acknowledging any of this. As for you, FJ .. you've already ignored it. How come .. ?

Idealistic Ignorance. Plain and simple.

[fj1200]

Idealistic Ignorance. Plain and simple.

What did I ignore?

[Black Diamond]

What did I ignore?

Hmm. Interesting. Does the word ignorance come from the word ignore?

[fj1200]

Hmm. Interesting. Does the word ignorance come from the word ignore?

Not sure. But I do know that "didn't post" does not equal "didn't know." :poke:

[Drummond]

Do try to keep up with the program. Gunny said he wanted to be judged by his peers, I went looking and it appears that this British soldier was judged by his peers. That was the point of the link.

Well, exactly. You say it yourself ... that was the point of the link. SO ... how come you couldn't react to the subject-matter as an appreciative Conservative would've done, and done your so-called 'message' justice ?

The point, FJ, is that you really think like a Leftie, albeit one pretending not to be. So, you'll include those issues which occur to your Leftie brain as relevant, and, you'll ignore those you have no interest in.

You had a chance to show some proper consideration to 'Gunny's peers', as you put it, by making a point of showing that consideration. After all, the words WERE there, you didn't have to do anything more than paste them in a quote. But even despite what was staring you in the face (?), you couldn't do it.

Any more, in fact, that Noir would think of doing so ... eh ?

Perhaps it'd help you if you spent less time trying to Leftily identify with non-existent 'humanity' of the terrorist scum that troops fight ???


You spend way to much time deciding what I believe based on what I don't post when I've made thousands of posts here that you completely ignore... because you don't understand them and they prove you wrong.

It'd help, FJ, if you didn't keep proving me right !! More and more evidence comes my way which backs up what I say. It KEEPS pointing to one conclusion. One conclusion ONLY.

Post #101 in this thread. Here, use this link ...

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?53316-War-Crimes-Inquiry&p=790377#post790377

Try to answer for your inconsistencies .. and not dodge a SECOND time.

[fj1200]

Well, exactly. You say it yourself ... that was the point of the link.

Your ignorant imagination is not my fault. Look up my answers to your stupid questions in the other threads in which they've been answered.

[Drummond]

Your ignorant imagination is not my fault. Look up my answers to your stupid questions in the other threads in which they've been answered.

-- Ducked. AGAIN.

[aboutime]

What did I ignore?



You set the example, and true meaning of the expression: "Ignorance is bliss!" Teaching all of us as you do.

[Elessar]

I'm only calling a war crime what is typically defined as a war crime.
What you are referring to I don't think falls anywhere close to war crimes and sounds more like rules of engagement.

What the hell do you know about ROE?

What is a war crime? You are pandering it...explain in examples and
legal FACT what you are saying... Case studies proven.

[Elessar]

What did I ignore?

Ignored FACT in favor of rumor.

You run your suck over suppositions.

That is why you are weak.

[fj1200]

-- Ducked. AGAIN.

Asked and answered, I'm sorry you don't understand. Besides, whatever I say, or don't say, you just make it up anyway.


What the hell do you know about ROE?

What is a war crime? You are pandering it...explain in examples and
legal FACT what you are saying... Case studies proven.

I know that there are rules that cover engagements. I know that Gunny and CSM probably know them best here. I also know that there are several others that are in the same non-military boat as I. Does everyone need to pass your test before entering into a discussion?

Nevertheless I honestly have no idea what you think I'm trying to prove. Every time I ask you to show me you start down some other path.


Ignored FACT in favor of rumor.

You run your suck over suppositions.

That is why you are weak.

I didn't ignore any fact, let alone any FACT. But you do talk a lot without much backing yourself. :)

[Drummond]

Asked and answered, I'm sorry you don't understand. Besides, whatever I say, or don't say, you just make it up anyway.

No. DUCKED. With an excuse offered to keep on ducking ?

Posted AGAIN .. for you to duck AGAIN ....


You're a Thatcherite ? OK, then you've no honest objection to make against Big Government methodology. While she wasn't a fan of it, she nonetheless used it as a tool whenever she saw any practical advantage to it. If YOUR position differs from that, then you've lied about your Thatcherism.

If it doesn't ... then, you've lied about being staunchly anti-Big Government. This in turn defies your so-called 'Libertarian' bona fides.

However this is viewed, inconsistencies are revealed about you. YOU CANNOT BE GENUINE.

So here's your choice. Stop lying about yourself, do the intelligent thing, and take up a position about yourself that makes your posting at least somewhat believable. OR, just try to bluster your way out of trouble with just another round of abuse.

What do you choose ? A path towards intelligent discussion, so that conversations can usefully move forward ? Or, the stupid path ... abuse instead of discussion, lies instead of believability ?

And if you'll admit the way your stances keep veering off towards a Leftie-friendly mindset (this explaining why you so rarely even TRY to initiate Conservative opinion-making) .. so much the better.

Which do you prefer (stupid question, but I'll ask it anyway) .. intelligent discussion, or yet more troll stuff ? Honesty, or more insults in its place ?

[fj1200]

.. intelligent discussion,

That's what I aim for. But then I have to deal with your ignorance. Happy now? :)

[Drummond]

That's what I aim for. But then I have to deal with your ignorance. Happy now? :)

And your ridiculous inconsistencies ?

Try posting honestly.

[fj1200]

And your ridiculous inconsistencies ?

Try posting honestly.

In your imagination. Try not being an incomprehensibly stupid moron. :)

[Drummond]

In your imagination. Try not being an incomprehensibly stupid moron. :)

You duck. You don't learn, you fail to make the smallest extent of progress towards truly honest posting. Your creativity in posting, even in terms of your variety of abuse, is just about nonexistent. You're reduced to mere one-liners containing abusive comment .. again and again.

So ... which of us, in truth, is REALLY the moron, FJ ?

Is there a better description possible of an agenda-driven troll ?

[fj1200]

So ... which of us, in truth, is REALLY the moron, FJ ?

You are of course. I've proven you stupid over and over.

[Drummond]

You are of course. I've proven you stupid over and over.

For thinking that good, honest, rational debate with you will ever be possible ?:rolleyes:

[aboutime]

You are of course. I've proven you stupid over and over.


That's pretty telling about you fj. Since you come here to constantly set the standards of being stupid.

Hat's off to you for finally saying something most of us can totally agree with you on, using your own experience as the teacher..:clap:

[fj1200]

For thinking that good, honest, rational debate with you will ever be possible ?:rolleyes:

I will continue to slap you around as long as you "debate" from your ignorant imagination. Debate issues, facts, opinions, etc. while leaving your blather at the door and you'll get what you say you want. Don't, and it's on you. :)

[Drummond]

I will continue to slap you around as long as you "debate" from your ignorant imagination. Debate issues, facts, opinions, etc. while leaving your blather at the door and you'll get what you say you want. Don't, and it's on you. :)

You seriously think you're 'slapping me around' .. ?? This is priceless stuff .. :laugh::laugh::rolleyes:

FJ - you dodge, duck, abuse, in fact you'll do whatever it takes to AVOID MY CHALLENGES, and AVOID REVEALING, AWKWARD TRUTHS.

Post honestly. Reputably. Is that so very difficult ?? :rolleyes:

If you were the Conservative you SAY you are, it'd be second nature to you.

[fj1200]

You seriously think you're 'slapping me around' ..

As evidenced by your not discussing the issues and continuing to whine about me. You should try NOT screwing up every thread with your ignorant blather but it seems you are incapable. :(

[Drummond]

As evidenced by your not discussing the issues and continuing to whine about me. You should try NOT screwing up every thread with your ignorant blather but it seems you are incapable. :(

Understood. You'd rather I wasn't so revealing about you. Difficult to cope with in any 'credible' way, eh ?

And this is rich, coming from you. I've lost count of all the threads you've hijacked ......

[fj1200]

Understood. You'd rather I wasn't so revealing about you. Difficult to cope with in any 'credible' way, eh ?

And this is rich, coming from you. I've lost count of all the threads you've hijacked ......

Man you're stupid. You can't even prove the ignorance of your imagination and you claim I'm hijacking threads. Pointing out that you are a blithering idiot is not the definition of hijack.

[aboutime]

Understood. You'd rather I wasn't so revealing about you. Difficult to cope with in any 'credible' way, eh ?

And this is rich, coming from you. I've lost count of all the threads you've hijacked ......



Sir Drummond. In ref to all of the blather from fj. Simple remedy for all of us is...just imagine that fj is speaking (ALOUD) to himself while looking into a mirror, and typing.

[Elessar]

Sir Drummond. In ref to all of the blather from fj. Simple remedy for all of us is...just imagine that fj is speaking (ALOUD) to himself while looking into a mirror, and typing.

Have you ever heard of blowing smoke up your own ass?

FJ is good at it.

[aboutime]

Have you ever heard of blowing smoke up your own ass?

FJ is good at it.



Sounds like a better remedy, and treatment for Hemmorids too! Never thought fj would include SMOKE!:clap:

[sundaydriver]

. You don't learn, Is there a better description possible of an agenda-driven troll ?

1) Troll

2) Get slapped

3) Whine, cry, & complain

4) Think You're winning

5) REPEAT

:laugh2: No, that pretty much sums it up.

[Drummond]

1) Troll

2) Get slapped

3) Whine, cry, & complain

4) Think You're winning

5) REPEAT

:laugh2: No, that pretty much sums it up.

You missed out FJ's penchant for very frequent, gratuitous abuse - a clear oversight, I'm afraid. Otherwise, I'll concede that you've done a good job on him ... ;)

[Drummond]

Man you're stupid. You can't even prove the ignorance of your imagination and you claim I'm hijacking threads. Pointing out that you are a blithering idiot is not the definition of hijack.

Well, considering that the subject of this thread is 'WAR CRIMES INQUIRY' .... :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

[aboutime]

You missed out FJ's penchant for very frequent, gratuitous abuse - a clear oversight, I'm afraid. Otherwise, I'll concede that you've done a good job on him ... ;)



After reading, and laughing at most of the endless dribble from fj. I almost wish I was back to drinking, and asking fj to SHARE whatever it must be he is drinking, inhaling, or splashing all over himself.:laugh:

[sundaydriver]

You missed out FJ's penchant for very frequent, gratuitous abuse - a clear oversight, I'm afraid. Otherwise, I'll concede that you've done a good job on him ... ;)


Hint: Look up psychological projection definition.

[aboutime]

Hint: Look up psychological projection definition.



sundaydriver. Back in the 60's, and 70's, before Political Correctness took over. We called them "NUTS!"

[sundaydriver]

sundaydriver. Back in the 60's, and 70's, before Political Correctness took over. We called them "NUTS!"

Yeah, I was there. Here I think the correct term is knucklehead.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You missed out FJ's penchant for very frequent, gratuitous abuse - a clear oversight, I'm afraid. Otherwise, I'll concede that you've done a good job on him ... ;)


This is the fj you are dealing with my friend.-Tyr



http://thenarcissistinyourlife.com/narcissists-projections-are-psychologically-abusive/

Narcissist’s Projections are Psychologically Abusive

November 10, 2012 Linda Martinez-Lewi PhDNo Commentsnarcississtic personality, Uncategorized
A projection is an unconscious defense mechanism in which the individual ejects aggressive, negative feelings and thoughts on to another person. Most people are unaware of their projections. If they get upset or angry or enraged,they simply let it spew out on those closest to them—children, spouses, business associates, siblings.

Narcissists are constantly projecting feelings that they cannot tolerate out rather than turning inward, identifying that they are projecting and owning what they have done. The narcissist creates his own world. Everything revolves around him/her. He believes that he is the initiator and master of his personal and professional domain. Everyone has a role and that is of serving him and his specific purposes. This characterlogical structure is not going to change; it is rigid and unyielding. Besides the narcissist is never wrong. He automatically blames others when anything goes awry. It is very stressful to be the recipient of narcissistic projections. The sheer force of the narcissist’s accusations and recriminations is stunning and disorienting. No one deserves to be accused, demeaned, humiliated and treated like an inferior human being. When we are children and have a narcissistic parent we have no choice and must learn how to survive these abusive conditions. As adults we have alternatives. We can confront the narcissist in a civil manner and communicate that we have personal boundaries and that this person has stepped over them. In expressing these thoughts it is important to remain emotionally detached from the narcissist’s reaction. He/she is waiting for you to cower when he comes back with a counter-attack.

It is vital that you learn to protect yourself from narcissistic abuse. You are in control of your reaction to the narcissist. You cannot change his/her personality structure but you are capable of stating clearly that you deserve to be treated with respect. You expect nothing less. Narcissists feel so entitled and would never believe that you would disagree with them. They are so delusional, thinking and believe that they are superior to everyone else, they know that you will cave in to their demands and threats of recrimination. Sometimes it is necessary to walk away , meaning separation and divorce from the narcissistic spouse or ending the business relationship.

Respond to the narcissist’s psychological abuse by practicing ways to remain calm, separate, mentally clear and discerning and focused in dealing with these individuals. Consistent meditation practice is a form of keeping the mind calm and strong. The practice of yoga is another way of deflecting narcissistic abuse. The discipline of these practices builds a flexible, grounded, intuitive person. You are a separate solid human being. You stand on the ground of your authenticity. Visit my website:thenarcissistinyourlife.com

Linda Martinez-Lewi, Ph.D.
Telephone Consultation:United States and International
Book: Freeing Yourself from the Narcissist in Your Life



We regular folks just call them nuts and arrogant assholes..-Tyr

[jimnyc]

Why ignore insults when you can enjoy them? :salute:

For your own comments I've really nothing more to add to the convo, and you didn't ask a question, so I didn't reply.


Drummond, do you think that if an allegation of a crime is made, that allegation should be investigated?

Which question were you answering with your own question? :) Odd when someone says they have nothing to add, doesn't want to reply & complains about insults - then goes ahead and replies to those he complains is insulting him, without them asking questions, and you want to continue the conversation, obviously, by asking questions of your own.

Sounds to me like you weren't interested in the reasonable discussion, but jumped at the chance to continue conversation on top of your complaint. Or perhaps you cherry pick what you would like to reply to. :beer:

[Drummond]

This is the fj you are dealing with my friend.-Tyr



We regular folks just call them nuts and arrogant assholes..-Tyr:clap::clap::clap:

Oh, I'm sure I could do better than that, if I really tried .... :laugh::laugh:

[fj1200]

Have you ever heard of blowing smoke up your own ass?

FJ is good at it.

Considering that you're in agreement with the banana and avoiding proving your posit... Any more spoofs you'd like to post?


You missed out FJ's penchant for very frequent, gratuitous abuse -

That is correct. I am not very nice to the interminably stupid.


Well, considering that the subject of this thread is 'WAR CRIMES INQUIRY' ....

That makes no sense except that any logic you attempt to employ is certainly a crime.


This is the fj you are dealing with my friend.-Tyr

Your words are small and inconsequential. Knuckleheads sitting in a circle trying to keep out fact and truth.

[Drummond]

That is correct. I am not very nice to the interminably stupid.

This explains why you look to me for further punishing revelations about yourself, rather than just try for honesty ? You're using me to be nasty to yourself .. ?


That makes no sense except that any logic you attempt to employ is certainly a crime.

It's now a 'criminal offence' to prove you to be a Leftie .. ????

[Drummond]

Your words are small and inconsequential. Knuckleheads sitting in a circle trying to keep out fact and truth.

A display of a Conservative finding comradely common cause with ideological colleagues .. ??

What's wrong with this picture ?

[fj1200]

This explains why you look to me for further punishing revelations about yourself, rather than just try for honesty ? You're using me to be nasty to yourself .. ?

You get more and more stupid day after day. Honesty is you're a moron and I'm a small government, Constitutional conservative; TRUTH and FACT don't change! :)

[fj1200]

A display of a Conservative finding comradely common cause with ideological colleagues .. ??

What's wrong with this picture ?

A. There isn't much conservative in the midst of you folks, and
2. There is nothing good about reveling in your own ignorance.

[Drummond]

You get more and more stupid day after day. Honesty is you're a moron and I'm a small government, Constitutional conservative; TRUTH and FACT don't change! :)

TRUTH and FACT basically don't change (although, since the world isn't a static place and fossilised dogmatism insists it should be, this can be questioned ...).

But one fact about you isn't changing. You remain a fraud.

You're a so-called 'Thatcherite' ? Yet, you disagree with everything she did of a Big Government nature, you disagree with her tax raising, you disagree with her spending cutbacks (therefore, her version of austerity measures !) .. and to cap it all, you say you're a Constitutional Conservative, something Mrs Thatcher could never have been, because she governed WITHOUT a Constitution !!

It's actually difficult to see how you could possibly be any version of a 'Thatcherite', much less an 'ultimate' one ....

You are demonstrably not what you've claimed to be. You remain a fraud.

[aboutime]

A. There isn't much conservative in the midst of you folks, and
2. There is nothing good about reveling in your own ignorance.



Thanks for scolding us fj. This is the price we all had to pay for trying to EMULATE You! Following your lead seems to be your favorite excuse to disguise your own ignorance. Let us hear more.

[fj1200]

But one fact about you isn't changing. You remain a fraud.

I'd rather be a fraud in the eyes of a delusional idiot than the delusional idiot. You have no clue about truth and fact.

[Gunny]

Has anyone stated that those alleged of any crimes are guilty?

Aren't YOU supposed to be the Englishman here? So how then is it I understand it better than you? You're trying to play semantics with your betters. And ignoring my original comment on the matter. I stated you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. Arresting someone, incarcerating them until they can prove their innocence at trial is a presumption of guilt, not innocence.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

A. There isn't much conservative in the midst of you folks, and
2. There is nothing good about reveling in your own ignorance.


There is nothing good about reveling in your own ignorance.

Well then, why do you do that so often? Serious question as , you so often pretend confusion etc. , when Jim and/or Gunny calls you on your infantile crap.
Yes, we notice little things like that....--Tyr

[fj1200]

Well then, why do you do that so often? Serious question as , you so often pretend confusion etc. , when Jim and/or Gunny calls you on your infantile crap.
Yes, we notice little things like that....--Tyr

I never revel in ignorance; That's your game. You could discuss the issue like an adult rather than a child or will this be another of your post-n-runs?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I never revel in ignorance; That's your game. You could discuss the issue like an adult rather than a child or will this be another of your post-n-runs?
Do you ever get tired of using that same old line and that post and run crap?
As if anybody would have cause to have to run from you other than sheer boredom and irritation at your abject ignorance on subjects that you pretend immense knowledge and absolute infinite wisdom on..
God, do you really believe you are that intelligent?
Here is a hint, a clue if you will dude, if GOOGLE is your mainstay--you aren't that bright--get it???-Tyr

[fj1200]

Do you ever get tired of using that same old line and that post and run crap?

You do it so often while whining and not discussing. :dunno:

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You do it so often while whining and not discussing. :dunno:
Many run from you because you are so like a merry-go-round, they end up explaining your errors to you over and over again.
Such does get boring as hell you know. I do sometimes get a kick out of seeing which little tactic you try to use on me-as you are now quite predictable in your replies and liberal ploys..-Tyr

[fj1200]

Many run from you because you are so like a merry-go-round, they end up explaining your errors to you over and over again.

:blah: You say as you whine about me without discussing the thread. :rolleyes:

[aboutime]

I'd rather be a fraud in the eyes of a delusional idiot than the delusional idiot. You have no clue about truth and fact.


You'd rather be a fraud in YOUR eyes? Thanks for finally admitting what most of us have known a long time. As for clue's about truth and fact. That's your Delusion, which verifies the idiocy you try to disguise here.

[Drummond]

I'd rather be a fraud in the eyes of a delusional idiot than the delusional idiot. You have no clue about truth and fact.

Hilarious. :laugh::laugh:

Truth and fact is what I keep posting. Your reaction is to avoid it when that truth, those facts, prove you to be a fraud.

'The Ultimate Thatcherite', who opposes Big Government methodology (she employed it when necessary). Who opposes tax rises (she indulged: VAT increases have been mentioned). Who opposes spending cutbacks (she instituted a programme of them, over the objections of some of her Ministers). Who is strongly anti-austerity (AS IS TRUE OF A NUMBER OF LEFT WING PARTIES)

None of this is delusion, FJ .. but you keep on avoiding unwelcome, revealing truths. Why ?

BECAUSE YOU'RE A FRAUD.

Keep running from it ...:laugh::laugh:

[Elessar]

You'd rather be a fraud in YOUR eyes? Thanks for finally admitting what most of us have known a long time. As for clue's about truth and fact. That's your Delusion, which verifies the idiocy you try to disguise here.


I have said it before, and will say it again:

TRUTH is based on an Individual Perception and Mindset;

FACT is based on Irrefutable Proof of a subject or topic.

Liberals are always hollering about Truth;
Always preaching to others "You can't handle the Truth".

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I have said it before, and will say it again:

TRUTH is based on an Individual Perception and Mindset;

FACT is based on Irrefutable Proof of a subject or topic.

Liberals are always hollering about Truth;
Always preaching to others "You can't handle the Truth".

How the hell would they ever know, they run from truth like a fleeing gazelle from a hungry lion.
Libs are locked into the fantasy world where they are gods with infinite wisdom , merely attempting
to quell and CONTROL the ignorant masses. All of which are Republicans according to their arrogance and infinite stupidity.-Tyr

[Gunny]

I have said it before, and will say it again:

TRUTH is based on an Individual Perception and Mindset;

FACT is based on Irrefutable Proof of a subject or topic.

Liberals are always hollering about Truth;
Always preaching to others "You can't handle the Truth".

That's not just leftwingers that are stuck with that "my truth is fact" mindset. That's each and every human being. Very few can distinguish between truth and fact, IMO. The one I HAYE is being told by someone else why I did something or them telling me I said something I never said at all because they see and hear what they want to instead of what has been actually done or said. My ex could screw up "I am me".

All too often people ascribe their own own motives/mindest to the actions of others and it doesn't work that way. Those same people don't believe that simple statement. I don't think like you, and I do things for MY reasons, not yours. (that would be the ubiquitous "you").

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That's not just leftwingers that are stuck with that "my truth is fact" mindset. That's each and every human being. Very few can distinguish between truth and fact, IMO. The one I HAYE is being told by someone else why I did something or them telling me I said something I never said at all because they see and hear what they want to instead of what has been actually done or said. My ex could screw up "I am me".

All too often people ascribe their own own motives/mindest to the actions of others and it doesn't work that way. Those same people don't believe that simple statement. I don't think like you, and I do things for MY reasons, not yours. (that would be the ubiquitous "you").

True, but libs are by far the worst and most arrogant offenders IMHO.
SO ARROGANT AS TO BE CERTIFIED ASSHOLES ABOUT IT MORE THAN ANY OTHER GROUP-EXCEPT PERHAPS
THE MUZZIES.
As the muzzies will happily kill you because you deserve it for not being muzzy!!!!
Only their murdering version of God is the TRUTH according to their insanity.
I fail to see how any group can be or do worse than that. --TYR

[fj1200]

Truth and fact is what I keep posting.

Truth, fact, and you are not to well acquainted.


I have said it before, and will say it again:

TRUTH is based on an Individual Perception and Mindset;

FACT is based on Irrefutable Proof of a subject or topic.

I'm not sure anyone disagrees.

[Gunny]

True, but libs are by far the worst and most arrogant offenders IMHO.
SO ARROGANT AS TO BE CERTIFIED ASSHOLES ABOUT IT MORE THAN ANY OTHER GROUP-EXCEPT PERHAPS
THE MUZZIES.
As the muzzies will happily kill you because you deserve it for not being muzzy!!!!
Only their murdering version of God is the TRUTH according to their insanity.
I fail to see how any group can be or do worse than that. --TYR

I'll have to disagree with you. It's universal. There are many factors that weigh in. Some genetic, but mostly societal. What people are raised to believe and think. Most enlisted military people aren't afforded that luxury. Politics wasn't our job, and in fact, hindered them. If you listen to any of these military people on these so-called news shows (which are nothing but editorials), the enlisted people cut straight to the chase. I didn't allow politics in my unit. Point A to Point B and how we're going to get from the former to the latter. End of story.

And trust me, that isn't bragging. Just stating fact. It's gotten me in more trouble in the civilian world than Jim's got bandwidth. Y'all want to blame someone. My mindset is this is what is wrong, this as how we fix it and do it right the next time.

From my observation the left rides on emotion. They create controversy where there is none as some selling point and people who are easily led will follow it. How long is it the Dems have made promised to blacks; yet, they STILL live in inner-city ghetto's. Been about 50 years, hasn't it?

The right's full of pussies afraid to speak up for themselves so they don't offend anyone. That too is emotion based.

If people in this country actually started thinking instead of believing the BS from BOTH parties, they'd (the parties) be in trouble. Lazy Americans don't want to think. They'd rather be told what to think and usually go with whatever Mommy and Daddy told them is right.

[Drummond]

Truth, fact, and you are not to well acquainted.

... says the Leftie who's busily running from my posting both truthfully and factually !!!

I did so, here ...

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?53316-War-Crimes-Inquiry&p=791189#post791189

.. and you've yet to answer any of it. But of course, you cannot satisfactorily do so. You know it. So do I. You just won't admit the obvious.

[fj1200]

... says the Leftie who's busily running from my posting both truthfully and factually !!!

I did so, here ...

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?53316-War-Crimes-Inquiry&p=791189#post791189

.. and you've yet to answer any of it. But of course, you cannot satisfactorily do so. You know it. So do I. You just won't admit the obvious.

Linking back to your previous idiotic posts doesn't make them less idiotic. This thread is about war crimes and you failing in other threads doesn't mean that you get to bloviate all over again. You should stop living in the past.

[Gunny]

Linking back to your previous idiotic posts doesn't make them less idiotic. This thread is about war crimes and you failing in other threads doesn't mean that you get to bloviate all over again. You should stop living in the past.

The difference is, as previously stated, there's a BIG one where what is considered a "war crime" is. There's a military definition 99.9% of us adhere to. Then there's the definitions used by politicos. They do the same thing to us they are currently doing to police. No one wants to act for fear of some nutbrain back here in the World making some wild-ass accusation.

Let's buy a clue for $50: We wage war. That's what we do. We're not the welcoming committee for Hare Krishna. Anyone that thinks you can wage war without waging war needs a labotomy.

[fj1200]

The difference is, as previously stated, there's a BIG one where what is considered a "war crime" is. There's a military definition 99.9% of us adhere to. Then there's the definitions used by politicos. They do the same thing to us they are currently doing to police. No one wants to act for fear of some nutbrain back here in the World making some wild-ass accusation.

The OP mentioned "war crimes" and "murder, abuse, and torture." It would be helpful to know what standard they're using. Hopefully it turns up a whole lot of nothing.

[Drummond]

Linking back to your previous idiotic posts doesn't make them less idiotic. This thread is about war crimes and you failing in other threads doesn't mean that you get to bloviate all over again. You should stop living in the past.

And you should stop running.

[fj1200]

And you should stop running.

:shrug: Try again later, adults are trying to discuss issues related to the thread at hand.

[Gunny]

The OP mentioned "war crimes" and "murder, abuse, and torture." It would be helpful to know what standard they're using. Hopefully it turns up a whole lot of nothing.

Probably the same definition they use for "torture". Anything they think they can sling against the wall. Contrary to popular belief, I defy ANY ONE of these accusers to find ANY military personnel that condones murder, abuse or torture. You haven't been around to see the pack turn on the lone idiot wolf. They tarnish our names and bring disrespect down on all of us. And their individual actions go against everything we believe in and stand for.

I never had that problem. My Marines were more afraid of me than the enemy and they knew exactly where I stood. You commit a crime on my watch I'll beat you down where you stand , then write your ass up. Wearing a uniform and carrying a loaded weapon is NOT a license to play God.

[aboutime]

:shrug: Try again later, adults are trying to discuss issues related to the thread at hand.



If that is true. You should present your PRE-SCHOOL graduation certificate...when you finish Pre-school.

You really are quite an idiot. You are dumb, ignorant, stupid, and a hypocrite to boot. Trying to teach everyone to be just LIKE you is backfiring. As far as the thread. YOU and children should be SEEN, and not HEARD.

[Drummond]

:shrug: Try again later, adults are trying to discuss issues related to the thread at hand.

... then I suggest that you leave them to it, as it's obvious that you'll just keep running. So much better than the sniping likes of ...

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?53316-War-Crimes-Inquiry&p=790979#post790979

[fj1200]

... then I suggest that you leave them to it, as it's obvious that you'll just keep running. So much better than the sniping likes of ...


You get more and more stupid day after day. Honesty is you're a moron and I'm a small government, Constitutional conservative; TRUTH and FACT don't change! :)

Are you trying to get on my good side by repeatedly pointing back to my truthful posts? That's kind of cool of you.

[Drummond]

Are you trying to get on my good side by repeatedly pointing back to my truthful posts? That's kind of cool of you. :bsmeter:

Preferring NOT to stick to 'War Crimes Inquiry' material ?

So far as I'm aware, I've yet to point to ANY 'truthful' post of yours .. !! :laugh::laugh:

If you were more realistically self-aware, you'd be highly embarrassed by now. As it is, you're still running (sort of) ......... :shark:

[fj1200]

Preferring NOT to stick to 'War Crimes Inquiry' material ?

This thread does have a topic you know. And it's not your penchant for whining.

[Gunny]

I'm only calling a war crime what is typically defined as a war crime.



What you are referring to I don't think falls anywhere close to war crimes and sounds more like rules of engagement.

I missed this one. "War Crime" is a misnomer; whether or not, technically accurate. The term is used to identify entire regimes, like ISIS and/or Syria. Atrocities are carried out with approval that begins at the top. An individual violation the Law of War and the UCMJ are usually held accountable by their respective branch of service.

As with many things, the term has become to mean something in practice other than it actually means by definition.

[Drummond]

This thread does have a topic you know. And it's not your penchant for whining.

Ahem ... yes, I know.

I quoted it to you ...

Think of your 'suddenly becoming all fired up with enthusiasm for respecting it' as a good means of making your escape (for now) from truth.

:shark::panicsmiley::martian::martian:

[fj1200]

Ahem ... yes, I know.

You're not anywhere close to the thread topic.

[fj1200]

I missed this one. "War Crime" is a misnomer; whether or not, technically accurate. The term is used to identify entire regimes, like ISIS and/or Syria. Atrocities are carried out with approval that begins at the top. An individual violation the Law of War and the UCMJ are usually held accountable by their respective branch of service.

As with many things, the term has become to mean something in practice other than it actually means by definition.

Thank you. Sometimes a question is just an inquiry where I'd like to know something. :salute: