Rick Perry defends the 4 marines

[Stellar]

The problem with this particular "crime" is that unlike robbing a bank or speeding, this crime could very likely end up causing the death of many many more people. It was not just "stupid" it was reckless.

Really? We're going to play the "what could happen" game? I guess this crime could very likely also end up causing a backpack nuke to explode in NYC as retaliation also. Hell, it could cause WWIII!

Depleted Uranium is it?

Depleted uranium is genocide? Really? God, I guess we're also comitting genocide with lead poisoning aswell, you know, with all the lead in our bullets.

[james1951]

Really? We're going to play the "what could happen" game? I guess this crime could very likely also end up causing a backpack nuke to explode in NYC as retaliation also. Hell, it could cause WWIII!

Depleted uranium is genocide? Really? God, I guess we're also comitting genocide with lead poisoning aswell, you know, with all the lead in our bullets.

Lead bullets do not cause mass miscarriages and babies born dead or so deformed they die soon after.

Lead bullets do not sterilize large groups of then enemy so they cannoy give birth to more of the people you are trying to destroy. It is proven and the US ignores UN sanctions at their will.

Why not urninate of their dead so they will get really "p***ed off" pardon the pun, and also p*** of their fellow muslims that have nuclear weapons and may not want to become the next victim of a US urination insult/assault

Edited January 23, 2012 by james1951

[Stellar]

Lead bullets do not cause mass miscarriages and babies born dead or so deformed they die soon after.

Lead bullets do not sterilize large groups of then enemy so they cannoy give birth to more of the people you are trying to destroy. It is proven and the US ignores UN sanctions at their will.

Neither does DI. Care to show me what UN sanction youre referring to, regarding DI?

[Corp]

Depleted Uranium is it?

No it's a type of weapon, not a focused policy to wipe out a particular social, ethnic, or religious group.

[Stellar]

No it's a type of weapon, not a focused policy to wipe out a particular social, ethnic, or religious group.

I wouldnt even call it a type of weapon. Its a type of metal used in ammunition and armor.

[james1951]

No it's a type of weapon, not a focused policy to wipe out a particular social, ethnic, or religious group.

It is a type of weapon BANNED by the united weapons because of its genocidal properties.

[james1951]

I wouldnt even call it a type of weapon. Its a type of metal used in ammunition and armor.

hahahaha "armor" below is an excerpt from this report http://www.michaelparenti.org/DefyingSanctions.html

Not everyone shows better morale. It is said that the most depressed officials in Iraq can be found in the Ministry of Health, not surprisingly given the tragedies they confront. Aside from the 200,000 Iraqis slaughtered during the Gulf War, an additional 1.5 million civilians have died since 1991 as a result of the sanctions, according to UNICEF reports and the Red Cross, many from what normally would be treatable and curable illnesses. Of these victims, 600,000 are children under 5 years of age. Maternal mortality rates have more than doubled, and 70 percent of Iraqi women suffer from anemia. Given the tons of depleted uranium used during the Allied attacks, cancer rates have skyrocketed: the childhood leukemia rate is now the highest in the world. Most of the leukemia increase is in southern Iraq where the bombing was heaviest.

yes genocide

Urinating on people who will soon be no more is not so dangerous, unless it sets an example for the country next door who does have nuclear weapons and knows that starting a nuclear holocaust is the road to heaven and ridding the world of infidels.

[Fluffybunny]

hahahaha "armor" below is an excerpt from this report http://www.michaelparenti.org/DefyingSanctions.html

Not everyone shows better morale. It is said that the most depressed officials in Iraq can be found in the Ministry of Health, not surprisingly given the tragedies they confront. Aside from the 200,000 Iraqis slaughtered during the Gulf War, an additional 1.5 million civilians have died since 1991 as a result of the sanctions, according to UNICEF reports and the Red Cross, many from what normally would be treatable and curable illnesses. Of these victims, 600,000 are children under 5 years of age. Maternal mortality rates have more than doubled, and 70 percent of Iraqi women suffer from anemia. Given the tons of depleted uranium used during the Allied attacks, cancer rates have skyrocketed: the childhood leukemia rate is now the highest in the world. Most of the leukemia increase is in southern Iraq where the bombing was heaviest.

yes genocide

Urinating on people who will soon be no more is not so dangerous, unless it sets an example for the country next door who does have nuclear weapons and knows that starting a nuclear holocaust is the road to heaven and ridding the world of infidels.

Yeah, those medical problems couldn't possibly be due to the poor diet and lack of medical care in the region...

[james1951]

Yeah, those medical problems couldn't possibly be due to the poor diet and lack of medical care in the region...

Read the whole report and you will find quite the contrary. This was deliberate and planned murder of innocents and demolish of infrastructure,

[aquatus1]

And why bother apologizing to people you are systematically wiping of the map.

No one mentioned an apology other than yourself.

No one is wiping anyone off the map.

Come on now, James. The situation is not going to change simply because you choose to make it more dramatic. All it is going to do is make people wonder why you are trying to make so much out of so little. It devalues your claim.

Genocide leaves no one to retaliate.

And here you take it up yet another level, when the value of the argument was already stretched as it was.

Genocide. Really? And we are talking about four foolish marines who filmed themselves urinating on a corpse.

This actually results in negative credibility for the argument. People who were willing to give you the benefit of the doubt are now backing away from the argument because of the disproportionality.

Unless of course those people have friends with weapons of mass destruction who say to themselves "we're next" and if we are going down we will take millions of them down with us.

Fortunately, there will be those smart enough to go "Wait, how did you go from people p***ing on a corpse to imminent mass genocide?"

[aquatus1]

It is a type of weapon BANNED by the united weapons because of its genocidal properties.

I am assuming you mean the United Nations?

No, it is not banned by them. In fact, they have regularly rejected calls for banning.

James, are you under the impression that Depleted Uranium is dangerous because of radioactivity?

[Stellar]

It is a type of weapon BANNED by the united weapons because of its genocidal properties.

Put your money where your mouth is. Show me a single link from the UN that states DU is banned. I'm unaware of any.

Not everyone shows better morale. It is said that the most depressed officials in Iraq can be found in the Ministry of Health, not surprisingly given the tragedies they confront. Aside from the 200,000 Iraqis slaughtered during the Gulf War, an additional 1.5 million civilians have died since 1991 as a result of the sanctions, according to UNICEF reports and the Red Cross, many from what normally would be treatable and curable illnesses. Of these victims, 600,000 are children under 5 years of age. Maternal mortality rates have more than doubled, and 70 percent of Iraqi women suffer from anemia. Given the tons of depleted uranium used during the Allied attacks, cancer rates have skyrocketed: the childhood leukemia rate is now the highest in the world. Most of the leukemia increase is in southern Iraq where the bombing was heaviest.

Its a warzone for christ's sake. You expect everything to be normal? I'd like to see some scientific evidence that shows that this is all due to DU, rather than people crying bloody murder simply because the word "uranium" is used.

[james1951]

No one mentioned an apology other than yourself.

No one is wiping anyone off the map.

Come on now, James. The situation is not going to change simply because you choose to make it more dramatic. All it is going to do is make people wonder why you are trying to make so much out of so little. It devalues your claim.

And here you take it up yet another level, when the value of the argument was already stretched as it was.

Genocide. Really? And we are talking about four foolish marines who filmed themselves urinating on a corpse.

This actually results in negative credibility for the argument. People who were willing to give you the benefit of the doubt are now backing away from the argument because of the disproportionality.

Fortunately, there will be those smart enough to go "Wait, how did you go from people p***ing on a corpse to imminent mass genocide?"

Hey I took this all the way to a nuclear holocaust.

You know Iran has nukes and they are not gonna want American marines peeing on their dead soldiers.

[aquatus1]

Escalating is not making your argument stronger. If anything, it is doing the opposite. Go in the other direction. First establish that there is something to worry about to begin with.

[Fluffybunny]

Read the whole report and you will find quite the contrary. This was deliberate and planned murder of innocents and demolish of infrastructure,

why don't you start providing proof for your outlandish claims. I was in the Army for many years and was in Iraq, and dealt with Iraqi's who were fighters as well as civilians. There was no genocide and DU did nothing of what you are claiming. Perhaps you would like to offer some proof and it would be a different story. DU is used by plenty of countries all over the world for its' density and how well it shoots through what it is pointed at. It isn't the same as the uranium in a nuclear warhead. Stop with the hysterics and start proving your point.

[james1951]

Escalating is not making your argument stronger. If anything, it is doing the opposite. Go in the other direction. First establish that there is something to worry about to begin with.

Do you really think I have an argument?

I think it is horrible for people to kill other people. It is horrible for people to disrespect other people, but as pointed out, I am in no position to "argue" about whether or not these people should be prosecuted for what they did. I am in no position to understand the stresses these men had to face and its emotional and psychological effecs on them. I have no understanding of what their preparation for combat is in the first place, are they pumped on rock music and propaganda and drugs to get them to hate the enemy and be able to face the enemy.

All I have to say is "Can't we all just get along."

I do not like the term "war on terror" or "police state" I do believe we need to police the world and get rid of groups of international "criminals" This means you have to stop thinking about civilians as collateral damage. You name the criminals and you try to arrest them, killing them if you must. But you do NOT KILL CHILDREN or "innocent women and men" indiscriminately. For that those that have ordered soldiers to do so should be convicted of murder, because there is no "war" to be tried for "war crimes:, crimes against humanity yes and I will bet there is enough evidence to convict both Bushes of that crime.

[james1951]

why don't you start providing proof for your outlandish claims.

Actually I cannot respond because YOU chose not to put a connection to the 4 marines who are just a mini example of the disrespect and contempt many americans have for those countries who do not share their language , culture or religion. but a simmple google will support many of my claims. And while the UN was prevented from studying the DU issue, they did try and voted overwhelmingly to. Unfortunately all America had to do is VETO it to hide the truth from the UN.

Edited January 24, 2012 by james1951

[james1951]

Please be advised my post here and in any other forum are my opinion, most are just expressions of disappointment at mans inhumanity to man and have nothing to do with truth or reality.

I go on you tube and watch other peoples point of view and share them here, not necessarily agreeing with them but at least considering what they have to say and their feelings. I appreciate all the responses to my comments and remember, any spoken "untruth" is an opportunity to reveal your own perception of the truth of that issue.

[Fluffybunny]

why don't you start providing proof for your outlandish claims.

Actually I cannot respond because YOU chose not to put a connection to the 4 marines who are just a mini example of the disrespect and contempt many americans have for those countries who do not share their language , culture or religion. but a simmple google will support many of my claims. And while the UN was prevented from studying the DU issue, they did try and voted overwhelmingly to. Unfortunately all America had to do is VETO it to hide the truth from the UN.

Actually I cannot respond because YOU chose not to put a connection to the 4 marines who are just a mini example of the disrespect

Absolute silliness and has no basis in reality. It sounds like yet one more of your many excuses to avoid providing facts to back up your claims.

Another claim...yet no proof.

It is your job as the maker of the claims as the one who needs to provide proof as to back it up. If a simple google is all it takes, then it should be easy for you to provide proof. Go out there and find your proof and show them to us.

If you don't, it just puts you in company of all of the other conspiracy/UFO/Moon hoax people who make unfounded claims not based in reality and never provide facts for their outlandish claims.

[Fluffybunny]

Please be advised my post here and in any other forum are my opinion, most are just expressions of disappointment at mans inhumanity to man and have nothing to do with truth or reality.

I go on you tube and watch other peoples point of view and share them here, not necessarily agreeing with them but at least considering what they have to say and their feelings. I appreciate all the responses to my comments and remember, any spoken "untruth" is an opportunity to reveal your own perception of the truth of that issue.

You made CLAIMS. Opinions are proceeded by "In my opinion" or something similar. You made very strong, very aggressive claims.

[aquatus1]

Presentation counts, James. You can be right, justified, and have all the facts and conclusions, but if you can't pass on information in a credible and valid manner, or form an argument that lends support to your statements, you are just not going to be taken seriously.

In this case, you have even ended up getting some people bothered. Probably the worse thing you can do at this point is tell them that you were just making opinions. It makes it sound like you were waiting for them to make an emotional investment in the topic before attempting to leave it.

My recommendation to you is to cut your losses. In your next post, you should start over with a clear explanation of what your stance is and why you feel that way, particularly if it is just based on opinion (I will tell you right now that many of your opinions were not opinions, they were facts, and they were wrong). You will, of course, still be challenged or countered; this is a discussion forum, and that is what people do when they discuss. But at least they won't take it personally, and when you are dealing with topics like these, topics that are personal to some people (myself included), you need to be careful with your communication style.

[Corp]

It is a type of weapon BANNED by the united weapons because of its genocidal properties.

And that's the cue for you to provide proof that the UN banned DU because of its use in genocide policies. However I get the feeling that you're just throwing the word around without understanding its proper use and context. By doing so you're devaluing the word itself.

[james1951]

Absolute silliness and has no basis in reality. It sounds like yet one more of your many excuses to avoid providing facts to back up your claims.

Another claim...yet no proof.

It is your job as the maker of the claims as the one who needs to provide proof as to back it up. If a simple google is all it takes, then it should be easy for you to provide proof. Go out there and find your proof and show them to us.

If you don't, it just puts you in company of all of the other conspiracy/UFO/Moon hoax people who make unfounded claims not based in reality and never provide facts for their outlandish claims.

Thats where a lot of this comes from, it require no proof or facts, it is all opinions and perceptions. Its not a claim, its a possible perception.

Your opinion is as valid as anyone elses.

[james1951]

You made CLAIMS. Opinions are proceeded by "In my opinion" or something similar. You made very strong, very aggressive claims.

Please feel free to add an IMHO in front of any and all of my messages. Perhaps the expression may be strong and aggressive in YOUR OPINION, the claims themselves not so much.

[james1951]

And that's the cue for you to provide proof that the UN banned DU because of its use in genocide policies. However I get the feeling that you're just throwing the word around without understanding its proper use and context. By doing so you're devaluing the word itself.

My apologies for saying the UN has banned DU. It should have read the UN has been prevented from banning it or even studying it after the VAST majority have voted in favour of that study because of the incredible amount of evidence of its radioactivity and huge half life.

But those who employ it can easily prevent the vast majority from doing anything about it with a simple VETO.

The toothless tiger the UNA, The United Nations of America!