Al Qaida Leader Caught in Iraq

[red states rule]

if you don't know the difference between killing someone and murdering someone, then perhaps you really are too fucking numb to converse with.

go find a dictionary.... go tell me that Murtha was wrong about the marines at haditah, and if he was right, how is the truth "smearing"...I'll expect a report when I get back

ah, the Clinton defense

words do not mean anything

 

[CSM]

if you don't know the difference between killing someone and murdering someone, then perhaps you really are too fucking numb to converse with.

go find a dictionary.... go tell me that Murtha was wrong about the marines at haditah, and if he was right, how is the truth "smearing"...I'll expect a report when I get back

The problem with Murtha is he made his statements PRIOR to the completion of investigation/trial. He convicted those Marines publicly without benefit of judicial processes. That may be ok with you but I think it's bordering on ...*GASP*...un-American! The fact that he ended up being correct in his assessment does not exonerate him. He is a public figure and just like the President, bears some responsibility for upholding not only the Constitution but also the rules and regulations (decided by Congress) that govern the military.

 

[maineman]

ah, the Clinton defense

words do not mean anything

no...."murder" means something different than "kill"....

are you really not aware of that? murder requires, in most cases, a degree of premeditation or that the death was caused while in the commission of another felony. Killing is a much broader term. Murtha correctly used the word, "killers"....you incorrectly misquoted him as saying the marines were cold blooded "murderers", which they were not.

But I suppose, with an intellect the size of a mustard seed, and a language ability surpassed by most first graders, word definitions must be problematic for you.

 

[maineman]

The problem with Murtha is he made his statements PRIOR to the completion of investigation/trial. He convicted those Marines publicly without benefit of judicial processes. That may be ok with you but I think it's bordering on ...*GASP*...un-American! The fact that he ended up being correct in his assessment does not exonerate him. He is a public figure and just like the President, bears some responsibility for upholding not only the Constitution but also the rules and regulations (decided by Congress) that govern the military.

calling the marines "killers" when it became clear that they had killed people is not "convicting" them of anything. "Killing" is not a crime, is it? "Murder", however, is. If Murtha had called them cold blooded murderers, that would have been inappropriate....he did not call them that.

 

[CSM]

calling the marines "killers" when it became clear that they had killed people is not "convicting" them of anything. "Killing" is not a crime, is it? "Murder", however, is. If Murtha had called them cold blooded murderers, that would have been inappropriate....he did not call them that.

Semantics...even YOU know what he meant and what he was implying. I suppose that technically you are correct but I sure wonder how the heck you can overlook things like that.

 

[Gunny]

his own words? you just posted his words and they say NOTHING about FIGHTING TERRORISTS IN OKINAWA.

and Murtha never called anyone a murderer....he called them killers. and telling the truth is not smearing. it seems the marine corps thinks that their boys killed civilians in Haditha..... are the marine corps brass smearing troops too?

The Marines who were allegedly involved in the murder of civilians in Haditha, if found guilty, are criminals guilty of committing war crimes. They violate the laws of war, the Geneva Conventions, and and US military law.

If, in fact, they are guilty, they do not deserve the resepct nor loyalty of other Marines who DO obey the law.

 

[Annie]

his own words? you just posted his words and they say NOTHING about FIGHTING TERRORISTS IN OKINAWA.

and Murtha never called anyone a murderer....he called them killers. and telling the truth is not smearing. it seems the marine corps thinks that their boys killed civilians in Haditha..... are the marine corps brass smearing troops too?

See bolded, he doesn't wish the US military to engage the terrorists. My guess, is that this is a call harking back to George Washington's neutrality policy from his Farewell Address, which was brilliant then. Not so much, post WWI.

 

[maineman]

The Marines who were allegedly involved in the murder of civilians in Haditha, if found guilty, are criminals guilty of committing war crimes. They violate the laws of war, the Geneva Conventions, and and US military law.

If, in fact, they are guilty, they do not deserve the resepct nor loyalty of other Marines who DO obey the law.

I agree wholeheartedly.... the point being that "killing" itself is not a crime, "murder" is. Murtha merely correctly pointed out that those marines had killed a bunch of civilians.... that was really never in question..... but RSR, with Bush jism dripping off his lips and out of his well travelled ass, will try to paint Murtha in some unpatriotic light...which is completely inappropriate.

 

[maineman]

See bolded, he doesn't wish the US military to engage the terrorists. My guess, is that this is a call harking back to George Washington's neutrality policy from his Farewell Address, which was brilliant then. Not so much, post WWI.

your guess is wrong. Democrats, especially hawks like Murtha, are all for engaging terrorists. Murtha just correctly observes that the enemy is NOT the folks we are presently fighting in Iraq.

 

[Annie]

your guess is wrong. Democrats, especially hawks like Murtha, are all for engaging terrorists. Murtha just correctly observes that the enemy is NOT the folks we are presently fighting in Iraq.

Explain.

 

[red states rule]

calling the marines "killers" when it became clear that they had killed people is not "convicting" them of anything. "Killing" is not a crime, is it? "Murder", however, is. If Murtha had called them cold blooded murderers, that would have been inappropriate....he did not call them that.

I do not know what is worse, the Dems who slime the troops

or their supporters who defend them

 

[maineman]

Explain.

explain what? that sunnis and shiite insurgents fighting a civil war in Iraq are not the terrorists that attacked us? Do you really need that "explained" to you?

 

[maineman]

I do not know what is worse, the Dems who slime the troops

or their supporters who defend them

correctly noting that some marines killed civilians is hardly "sliming" them.

I KNOW what IS worse: republicans who would support this president and the policies of their party over the best interests of America.

 

[red states rule]

your guess is wrong. Democrats, especially hawks like Murtha, are all for engaging terrorists. Murtha just correctly observes that the enemy is NOT the folks we are presently fighting in Iraq.

Where?

From Okinawa?

 

[red states rule]

correctly noting that some marines killed civilians is hardly "sliming" them.

I KNOW what IS worse: republicans who would support this president and the policies of their party over the best interests of America.

To MM calling troops Nazi's, killers, uneducated, operators of torture chambers, and terrorists is not sliming - it is support

Dems are interested in only their political power so the US must lose in Iraq. What patriotism! Doing all you can to ensure the loss your country in a war so you can pick up seats in Congress

 

[maineman]

To MM calling troops Nazi's, killers, uneducated, operators of torture chambers, and terrorists is not sliming - it is support

Dems are interested in only their political power so the US must lose in Iraq. What patriotism! Doing all you can to ensure the loss your country in a war so you can pick up seats in Congress

I think all of those things are indeed not supportive statements and thank God that neither of my senators nor my congressman ever said such things.

As you know, I personally support our troops in real and substantive ways each and every week.

I want America to win every war that it is in.... we will pick up seats in congress because of your party's incompetence.

 

[red states rule]

I think all of those things are indeed not supportive statements and thank God that neither of my senators nor my congressman ever said such things.

As you know, I personally support our troops in real and substantive ways each and every week.

I want America to win every war that it is in.... we will pick up seats in congress because of your party's incompetence.

Surrender will not get Dems more seats in Congress - but it may get campaign donations from the Middle East

"not supportive" - my MM - tone down your harshness toward your fellow libs

 

[maineman]

Surrender will not get Dems more seats in Congress - but it may get campaign donations from the Middle East

"not supportive" - my MM - tone down your harshness toward your fellow libs

democrats do not want surrender.... we have been over this and the fact thatg you refuse to answer simple questions is proof that you have nothing but oneliner rhetoric ..... Bush's veto will bring more seats to democrats in congress.... the people are tired of this terrible conflict and our counterproductive role in it. the people want us to get out of Iraq and to start fighting islamic extremists.

 

[maineman]

for example:

regarding your inaccurate use of the word surrender:

Did Britain surrender Palestine in the spring of 1948? yes or no

 

[red states rule]

for example:

regarding your inaccurate use of the word surrender:

Did Britain surrender Palestine in the spring of 1948? yes or no

Losing so MM chanbes to subject

Go play some golf and think about your answers - get back to me later