Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

US soldiers "killed Afghans for sport and collected fingers"


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
155 replies to this topic

#151 Speed

Speed

    Banned

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,571
  • Reputation: 0
Banned

Posted 15 September 2010 - 01:45 PM

If the assertion is that people join the military, Speed should be a 5 Star General.


Wow!... Geeeze.....I ah.....; I ah ...don't know what to say.

#152 Chimera

Chimera

    Not Bant

  • Joined: 11-November 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 11,703
  • Reputation: 2,642
HUDDLER

Posted 15 September 2010 - 01:53 PM

Well, I linked to an article on the survey but I guess there wasn't any evidence in there to support the validity of the survey...


My mistake. I missed the link. I went to check and winced when I saw msnbc.com. We all know how unbiased msnbc is. /sarcasm. But I looked at it and found the sample portion to be about 1% of the pre-surge troop numbers (article was from May 2007).
Like I said, I wasn't asked. But who was? I'm not making excuses because I winced again while reading the fake excuses in the article - but for example, if you ask someone in finance, he probably learned what he knows about prisoners from movies. If you ask a grunt, he has probably picked up a few friends' body parts and is obviously going to take a more aggressive position. Again, not excuses - just different factors that are not considered. "Mistreating civilians or damaging property" covers a very broad topic. I would take that stat more seriously if they were divided into two categories. To me, it looks like two questions were combined to provide for more "yes" answers.

#153 Speed

Speed

    Banned

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,571
  • Reputation: 0
Banned

Posted 15 September 2010 - 02:05 PM

You need to clarify this statement for me.

Everything I have read regarding the Tillman incident contradicts your implied intentional targeting of Tillman by his fellow Rangers.

Also, I have read that he was well regarded by his fellow Rangers.

He was "leading" a grand total of 2 other guys, an AMF and another Ranger.
What rank do you think he was exactly? He was posthumously promoted to Cpl.

I'm confused, and your post does not jive with generally accepted facts of the case.

And the cover-up, which went ALL the way to the top, was disgusting.


http://digg.com/news...ntary_Takeaways

http://www.washingto...-2004May29.html

Edited by Speed, 15 September 2010 - 02:15 PM.


#154 Epistaxis

Epistaxis

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,184
  • Reputation: 51
HUDDLER

Posted 15 September 2010 - 02:22 PM

Yeah, thanks, but that article states what I am saying, NOT what you are saying.

He was killed in a regrettable and awful B on B situation.

NOT intentionally targeted or assassinated by his fellow Rangers, which is what you seem to be implying with your original post, which was what I was trying to get clarification on.

#155 Speed

Speed

    Banned

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,571
  • Reputation: 0
Banned

Posted 15 September 2010 - 03:06 PM

Yeah, thanks, but that article states what I am saying, NOT what you are saying.

He was killed in a regrettable and awful B on B situation.

NOT intentionally targeted or assassinated by his fellow Rangers, which is what you seem to be implying with your original post, which was what I was trying to get clarification on.


You don't know.

#156 ChucktownK

ChucktownK

    Gitmo Nation Detainee

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 12,043
  • Reputation: 0
HUDDLER

Posted 15 September 2010 - 03:13 PM

http://digg.com/news...ntary_Takeaways

http://www.washingto...-2004May29.html



When I bite into this post, I get the cool tingling sensation of a tin foilz.