Good Aim Soldier
HVAC
apologized to an Iraqi village after a soldier admitted using the
Quran -- Islam's holy book -- for target practice.
Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Hammond apologizes after a soldier admitted using
the Quran for target practice.
Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Hammond, commander of U.S. forces in Baghdad,
apologized to the Radhwaniya tribe for the staff sergeant, who was a
sniper section leader assigned to the headquarters of the 64th Armored
Regiment. He also read a letter of apology by the shooter.
"I come before you here seeking your forgiveness," Hammand said to
tribal leaders and others at the apology ceremony. "In the most humble
manner I look in your eyes today and I say please forgive me and my
soldiers."
Another military official kissed a Quran and presented it as "a humble
gift" to the tribal leaders.
The shooter, whose name was not released, shot at a Quran on May 9,
villagers said. The Quran used in the incident was discovered two days
later, according to the military.
A tribal leader said "the criminal act by U.S. forces" took place at a
shooting range at the Radhwaniya police station. After the shooters
left, an Iraqi policeman found a target marked in the middle of the
bullet-riddled Quran.
Copies of the pictures of the Quran obtained by CNN show multiple
bullet holes and an expletive scrawled on one of its pages.
John Locke
wrote:
>BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The U.S. military on Saturday formally
>apologized to an Iraqi village after a soldier admitted using the
>Quran -- Islam's holy book -- for target practice.
>
Why ? That's all it good for. And cowering to a bunch of ignorant
Muslim tribal nuts is a sign of weakness and fear. Something the
military should not be doing.
"It is far better to grasp the Universe
as it really is than to persist in delusion,
however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan
Mike Painter
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 15:56:01 -0700 (PDT), HVAC <MR....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The U.S. military on Saturday formally
>> apologized to an Iraqi village after a soldier admitted using the
>> Quran -- Islam's holy book -- for target practice.
>>
> Why ? That's all it good for. And cowering to a bunch of ignorant
> Muslim tribal nuts is a sign of weakness and fear. Something the
> military should not be doing.
>
About the Germans in WWI, the Germans and the Japanese in WWII, the
"commies" in Korea, the Viet Cong in Viet Nam.
Who has said it?
Nobody who was in combat against them.
thomas p.
"John Locke" <johnloc...@comcast.net> skrev i en meddelelse
news:v81v24hrsfc49fmla...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 15:56:01 -0700 (PDT), HVAC <MR....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The U.S. military on Saturday formally
>>apologized to an Iraqi village after a soldier admitted using the
>>Quran -- Islam's holy book -- for target practice.
>>
> Why ? That's all it good for. And cowering to a bunch of ignorant
> Muslim tribal nuts is a sign of weakness and fear. Something the
> military should not be doing.
The likely motive was to insult a specific group of people, whose beliefs do
not make nuttier than the (very probable) beliefs of the soldiers. It was
an example of gratuitous nastiness guaranteed to increase hostility and
resentment. The behavior deserves contempt.
Steve
The koran, the bible, thats all these books are good for, if indeed
they are good for that. These two books represent most of the paranoia
that lives in the human mind even today, and it's really a sad
statement of our humanity...
Sleepalot
How would you compare it to (say) cutting the heads, or
ears, or hands off people?
--
Sleepalot aa #1385
Davej
> [...]
> The shooter, whose name was not released, shot at a Quran on May 9,
> villagers said. The Quran used in the incident was discovered two days
> later, according to the military.
Once they chop the shooter into tiny bits they ought to shoot up a
Bible to make the locals feel better. Oh wait, we can't chop the
shooter into tiny bits? Then I suppose our alliance is at an end and
we will have to withdraw from the country...
thomas p.
"Sleepalot" <slee...@fsmail.net> skrev i en meddelelse
news:1ka33491mknrav6qt...@4ax.com...
I do not see the relevance of the question, unless you think that it somehow
justifies the offensive behavior of the soldiers.
thomas p.
"Davej" <gal...@hotmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:d55ac297-5e7a-46b6...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Good idea.
Sleepalot
You made a judgement about the soldier's behaviour. I tested
your judgement for worth. Seeing the relevance of my question
was part of that test. You failed.
--
Sleepalot aa #1385
thomas p.
I see, you do think that the bad behavior of others justifies bad behavior.
I do not share your moral values.
Sleepalot
No, you don't.
> you do think that the bad behavior of others justifies bad behavior.
Wrong. What I think is that there are worse things in the world than
shooting books.
>I do not share your moral values.
Quite possibly.
--
Sleepalot aa #1385
gud...@yahoo.com
> "thomas p." <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >"Sleepalot" <sleep...@fsmail.net> skrev i en meddelelse
> >news:k8v4345ep5h3j1iar...@4ax.com...
> >> "thomas p." <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>"Sleepalot" <sleep...@fsmail.net> skrev i en meddelelse
> >>>news:1ka33491mknrav6qt...@4ax.com...
> >>>> "thomas p." <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>"John Locke" <johnlocke98...@comcast.net> skrev i en meddelelse
> >>>>>news:v81v24hrsfc49fmla...@4ax.com...
> >>>>>> On Sat, 17 May 2008 15:56:01 -0700 (PDT), HVAC <MR.H...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The U.S. military on Saturday formally
> >>>>>>>apologized to an Iraqi village after a soldier admitted using the
> >>>>>>>Quran -- Islam's holy book -- for target practice.
>
> >>>>>> Why ? That's all it good for. And cowering to a bunch of ignorant
> >>>>>> Muslim tribal nuts is a sign of weakness and fear. Something the
> >>>>>> military should not be doing.
>
> >>>>>The likely motive was to insult a specific group of people, whose
> >>>>>beliefs
> >>>>>do
> >>>>>not make nuttier than the (very probable) beliefs of the soldiers. It
> >>>>>was
> >>>>>an example of gratuitous nastiness guaranteed to increase hostility and
> >>>>>resentment. The behavior deserves contempt.
>
> >>>> How would you compare it to (say) cutting the heads, or
> >>>> ears, or hands off people?
>
> >>>I do not see the relevance of the question, unless you think that it
> >>>somehow
> >>>justifies the offensive behavior of the soldiers.
>
> >> You made a judgement about the soldier's behaviour. I tested
> >> your judgement for worth. Seeing the relevance of my question
> >> was part of that test. You failed.
>
> >I see,
>
> No, you don't.
It is amazing how much you know about me. It includes things that I
have never said or implied. Couldn't we just talk about the issue
without you telling me what my opinions are?
>
> > you do think that the bad behavior of others justifies bad behavior.
>
> Wrong. What I think is that there are worse things in the world than
> shooting books.
I agree. As I implied in my first response to you, I do not see how
that changes anything. No matter what somebody does, there is always
something that could have been worse or was worse.
>
> >I do not share your moral values.
>
> Quite possibly.
And possibly you have made unjustified assumptions about me. I say
possibly because I do not really know what those assumptions are;
after all you only implied something negative about me. In the
meantime the actual issue has been ignored. My opinion is that what
the soldiers did was gratuitously offensive and guaranteed to make
their job both more difficult and dangerous. I will also specify that
I think much worse things have been done all over the world and
throughout history, however I do not see where I have said anything
that implies otherwise; can you point out where I did?
Hatter
>
> - Show quoted text -
In other words, just because the native beliefs are stupid, and they
are savages, doesn't justfy you mocking and offending them when you
and your men can be quite easily killed by said savages in your sleep.
It that's basic.
Hatter
thomas p.
"Hatter" <Hatt...@gmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:87cd5f22-e026-452c...@56g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
On May 21, 8:03 am, gudl...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On 21 Maj, 03:17, Sleepalot <sleep...@fsmail.net> wrote:
>> And possibly you have made unjustified assumptions about me. I say
>> possibly because I do not really know what those assumptions are;
>> after all you only implied something negative about me. In the
>> meantime the actual issue has been ignored. My opinion is that what
>> the soldiers did was gratuitously offensive and guaranteed to make
>> their job both more difficult and dangerous. I will also specify that
> >I think much worse things have been done all over the world and
> >throughout history, however I do not see where I have said anything
> >that implies otherwise; can you point out where I did?- Hide quoted
> >text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
>In other words, just because the native beliefs are stupid, and they
>are savages, doesn't justfy you mocking and offending them when you
>and your men can be quite easily killed by said savages in your sleep.
>It that's basic.
That is the practical point. There is also the fact that the soldiers were
very likely Christian and were there because their Commander in Chief
thought their Christian duty required it, i.e. their beliefs are equally
stupid and (at the very least) potentially just as savage. There is also
the question of the typical arrogance of a powerful, technologically
advanced country totally incapable of wondering how it would feel if they
were being "saved" by a foreign army that treated them with contempt while
insisting that they were friends.
Hatter
Sleepalot
Hmmm. Well I am assuming you mean what you say.
> It includes things that I have never said or implied.
Such as?
> Couldn't we just talk about the issue without you telling me
> what my opinions are?
Again Hmm. I have not told you what your opinions are, but
you _have_ told me what my opinions are .... right there V
>> > you do think that the bad behavior of others justifies bad behavior.
>>
>> Wrong. What I think is that there are worse things in the world than
>> shooting books.
>
>I agree. As I implied in my first response to you, I do not see how
>that changes anything.
No, in you first response, you said you couldn't see the relevance
of my question.
> No matter what somebody does, there is always
>something that could have been worse or was worse.
Ok, that's a fair enough statement - as far as it goes.
>> >I do not share your moral values.
>>
>> Quite possibly.
>
>And possibly you have made unjustified assumptions about me. I say
>possibly because I do not really know what those assumptions are;
>after all you only implied something negative about me.
Again, I don't see where I've made unjustified assumptions or
negative implications. _You_ said you do not share my moral
values, and I was inclined to agree.
> In the meantime the actual issue has been ignored. My opinion is
> that what the soldiers did was gratuitously offensive
My opinion is that what the soldiers did was _not_ inherently
offensive. A thing does not become offensive simply because
someone takes offence at it. People can take offence at pretty
much anything.
> and guaranteed to make their job both more difficult and dangerous.
Well that's a seperate question, imo. I'm no military tactician, but
I think that it can be useful to draw enemy fire in order to more
effectively neutralise it - but that's btw and Icbw. It's not a point
that concerns me.
> I will also specify that I think much worse things have been done
> all over the world and throughout history, however I do not see
> where I have said anything that implies otherwise; can you point
> out where I did?
No, I'm happy to agree that you haven't said otherwise.
--
Sleepalot aa #1385
thomas p.
"Sleepalot" <slee...@fsmail.net> skrev i en meddelelse
news:evq934ttpg30pml19...@4ax.com...
I would hope so. I said that I saw no relevance to your question. I meant
that. I still see no relevance to the question, and you still have not
explained what the relevance is. I have no interest in continuing this.
The incident itself was what I was interested in.
snip