Ist of 3 SEALs Not Guilty

A Captain's Mast almost automatically assumes guilt, and that the accused have elected limited administrative punishment rather than the possiblity of a serious felony conviction and time in the pen.
 
So Osama Bin Laden orchestrates an act of war against against the US and we are supposed to allow the Taliban to put on a farce of a trial and abide by its decision? Fuck off.
The sensible course of action would be to see how the trial played out and take things from there. As for the trial being a "farce", they had planned to have Pakistan try him in an international tribunal, so I see no reason to believe that this trial wouldn't have been subject to a similar level of scrutiny. If it did turn out to be a mock trial, several more favorable courses of action could have been taken. The Taliban were obviously willing to negotiate and I have little doubt that a diplomatic solution could have been reached to the satisfaction of both parties; the Taliban weren't exactly thrilled to host al-Qa'idah once the latter group began to stir up trouble internationally. If a satisfactory diplomatic solution proved to be unobtainable, continued funding for the United Islamic Front and/or targeted assassination of al-Qa'idah leaders should have been considered. A full scale invasion was absolutely the stupidest course of action to take. "Fuck off?" Fuck you.
 
So Osama Bin Laden orchestrates an act of war against against the US and we are supposed to allow the Taliban to put on a farce of a trial and abide by its decision? Fuck off.
The sensible course of action would be to see how the trial played out and take things from there. As for the trial being a "farce", they had planned to have Pakistan try him in an international tribunal, so I see no reason to believe that this trial wouldn't have been subject to a similar level of scrutiny. If it did turn out to be a mock trial, several more favorable courses of action could have been taken. The Taliban were obviously willing to negotiate and I have little doubt that a diplomatic solution could have been reached to the satisfaction of both parties; the Taliban weren't exactly thrilled to host al-Qa'idah once the latter group began to stir up trouble internationally. If a satisfactory diplomatic solution proved to be unobtainable, continued funding for the United Islamic Front and/or targeted assassination of al-Qa'idah leaders should have been considered. A full scale invasion was absolutely the stupidest course of action to take. "Fuck off?" Fuck you.

That's your opinion and coming from a terrorist apologist. Forgive me if I seem less than enthused. :cool:
 
You are a RETARD. We invaded Iraq because they violated the cease fire as I noted.
We had no business over there in the 90's, either. We could have stayed out of it in 2003 and been perfectly fine, I assure you. :cuckoo:

Now that you have a full-scale insurgency, hundreds of thousands of deaths, and a financial black hole on your hands, I'm apparently a "retard" for suggesting an alternative course of action. :lol:

Get real, moron.

The violation of UN Edicts was just a plus. If the UN had any back bone they would have done something, but being the cowards they are they did nothing.

Once again both invasions were justified. Go peddle your bullshit to someone that is stupid enough to buy it.
Western interference in the Islamic world is never justified and will always be met with resistance. Every dead serviceman, insurgent, and civilian has people like you to blame for meddling in the affairs of others.
 
So Osama Bin Laden orchestrates an act of war against against the US and we are supposed to allow the Taliban to put on a farce of a trial and abide by its decision? Fuck off.
The sensible course of action would be to see how the trial played out and take things from there. As for the trial being a "farce", they had planned to have Pakistan try him in an international tribunal, so I see no reason to believe that this trial wouldn't have been subject to a similar level of scrutiny. If it did turn out to be a mock trial, several more favorable courses of action could have been taken. The Taliban were obviously willing to negotiate and I have little doubt that a diplomatic solution could have been reached to the satisfaction of both parties; the Taliban weren't exactly thrilled to host al-Qa'idah once the latter group began to stir up trouble internationally. If a satisfactory diplomatic solution proved to be unobtainable, continued funding for the United Islamic Front and/or targeted assassination of al-Qa'idah leaders should have been considered. A full scale invasion was absolutely the stupidest course of action to take. "Fuck off?" Fuck you.

That's your opinion and coming from a terrorist apologist. Forgive me if I seem less than enthused. :cool:

Yeah, I expected your response to be about that substantive. Guppy sure knows how to pick 'em. ;)
 
The sensible course of action would be to see how the trial played out and take things from there. As for the trial being a "farce", they had planned to have Pakistan try him in an international tribunal, so I see no reason to believe that this trial wouldn't have been subject to a similar level of scrutiny. If it did turn out to be a mock trial, several more favorable courses of action could have been taken. The Taliban were obviously willing to negotiate and I have little doubt that a diplomatic solution could have been reached to the satisfaction of both parties; the Taliban weren't exactly thrilled to host al-Qa'idah once the latter group began to stir up trouble internationally. If a satisfactory diplomatic solution proved to be unobtainable, continued funding for the United Islamic Front and/or targeted assassination of al-Qa'idah leaders should have been considered. A full scale invasion was absolutely the stupidest course of action to take. "Fuck off?" Fuck you.

That's your opinion and coming from a terrorist apologist. Forgive me if I seem less than enthused. :cool:

Yeah, I expected your response to be about that substantive. Guppy sure knows how to pick 'em. ;)

middle_finger_flame.jpg
 
Congrats are in order for 1st Navy Seal found not guilty in connection with the 'alledged' abuse of that dirtbag terrorist suspect!

These savages live in caves, between rocks, slaughter their own people, freely wear
body-bombs, and this whiny ass complains about a swift shot to the gut or jaw?
(Probbly self inflicted, according to their Osama-approved training)

I wish the same outcome for the other Seals and wish this rediculous 'politically correct' persecution of our troops would end! Probably more to come though.

It will probably be a sad day however for the US media...no feel-good news for them today from the trial! GO SEALs!!!

:beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer:
 
I don't really get it. What's a punch in the face after wrongfully invading and occupying two countries? American foreign policy has become the embodiment of hypocrisy.

Neither invasion was "wrongful" BOTH were justified. Afghanistan harbored a person that carried out the worst attack on American soil ever.They provided him with safe haven, training areas and materials and supplies, allowing his terrorists to freely enter and exit the Country. When called on to cease and desist they REFUSED.

Iraq was in violation of numerous UN edicts and had routinely VIOLATED the cease fire from the 90 war. All that JUSTIFIED a US response to include an invasion.

Go peddle your lies somewhere else.

You are mistaken about Iraq. The US is not the muscle man for the UN. We were not authorized to take action on its behalf. None of which justified a US response.

Why do you think most of the major Bush foreign policy folks no longer can travel outside of our country? They will be arrested on war crimes warrants.
 
I don't really get it. What's a punch in the face after wrongfully invading and occupying two countries? American foreign policy has become the embodiment of hypocrisy.

Neither invasion was "wrongful" BOTH were justified. Afghanistan harbored a person that carried out the worst attack on American soil ever.They provided him with safe haven, training areas and materials and supplies, allowing his terrorists to freely enter and exit the Country. When called on to cease and desist they REFUSED.

Iraq was in violation of numerous UN edicts and had routinely VIOLATED the cease fire from the 90 war. All that JUSTIFIED a US response to include an invasion.

Go peddle your lies somewhere else.

You are mistaken about Iraq. The US is not the muscle man for the UN. We were not authorized to take action on its behalf. None of which justified a US response.

Why do you think most of the major Bush foreign policy folks no longer can travel outside of our country? They will be arrested on war crimes warrants.

In your dreams perhaps Starkey.....post a link to the said valid "war crimes warrants". and then read the UN Resolution that authorized us to invade Iraq....1441?
 
I don't really get it. What's a punch in the face after wrongfully invading and occupying two countries? American foreign policy has become the embodiment of hypocrisy.

Neither invasion was "wrongful" BOTH were justified. Afghanistan harbored a person that carried out the worst attack on American soil ever.They provided him with safe haven, training areas and materials and supplies, allowing his terrorists to freely enter and exit the Country. When called on to cease and desist they REFUSED.

Iraq was in violation of numerous UN edicts and had routinely VIOLATED the cease fire from the 90 war. All that JUSTIFIED a US response to include an invasion.

Go peddle your lies somewhere else.

You are mistaken about Iraq. The US is not the muscle man for the UN. We were not authorized to take action on its behalf. None of which justified a US response.

Why do you think most of the major Bush foreign policy folks no longer can travel outside of our country? They will be arrested on war crimes warrants.

RETARD ALERT. None of them will be arrested for anything. Or are Spanish, British, Italian, Polish and a host of other Countries diplomats in trouble too?

And we had EVERY right to invade. Further since Congress approved it and something like 40 Countries supported it you haven't a leg to stand on in complaining.
 
Neither invasion was "wrongful" BOTH were justified. Afghanistan harbored a person that carried out the worst attack on American soil ever.They provided him with safe haven, training areas and materials and supplies, allowing his terrorists to freely enter and exit the Country. When called on to cease and desist they REFUSED.

Iraq was in violation of numerous UN edicts and had routinely VIOLATED the cease fire from the 90 war. All that JUSTIFIED a US response to include an invasion.

Go peddle your lies somewhere else.

You are mistaken about Iraq. The US is not the muscle man for the UN. We were not authorized to take action on its behalf. None of which justified a US response.

Why do you think most of the major Bush foreign policy folks no longer can travel outside of our country? They will be arrested on war crimes warrants.

In your dreams perhaps Starkey.....post a link to the said valid "war crimes warrants". and then read the UN Resolution that authorized us to invade Iraq....1441?

I guess this must have been one of Starkey's unsolicited, unverifiable opinions presented as fact that requires no proof...:lol:
 
Neither invasion was "wrongful" BOTH were justified. Afghanistan harbored a person that carried out the worst attack on American soil ever.They provided him with safe haven, training areas and materials and supplies, allowing his terrorists to freely enter and exit the Country. When called on to cease and desist they REFUSED.

Iraq was in violation of numerous UN edicts and had routinely VIOLATED the cease fire from the 90 war. All that JUSTIFIED a US response to include an invasion.

Go peddle your lies somewhere else.

You are mistaken about Iraq. The US is not the muscle man for the UN. We were not authorized to take action on its behalf. None of which justified a US response.

Why do you think most of the major Bush foreign policy folks no longer can travel outside of our country? They will be arrested on war crimes warrants.

RETARD ALERT. None of them will be arrested for anything. Or are Spanish, British, Italian, Polish and a host of other Countries diplomats in trouble too?

And we had EVERY right to invade. Further since Congress approved it and something like 40 Countries supported it you haven't a leg to stand on in complaining.

And.... if we had finished the job properly the first time, we wouldn't have had to go back. I hope our politicians learned the lesson.... but I very much doubt it.
 
So Osama Bin Laden orchestrates an act of war against against the US and we are supposed to allow the Taliban to put on a farce of a trial and abide by its decision? Fuck off.
The sensible course of action would be to see how the trial played out and take things from there. As for the trial being a "farce", they had planned to have Pakistan try him in an international tribunal, so I see no reason to believe that this trial wouldn't have been subject to a similar level of scrutiny. If it did turn out to be a mock trial, several more favorable courses of action could have been taken. The Taliban were obviously willing to negotiate and I have little doubt that a diplomatic solution could have been reached to the satisfaction of both parties; the Taliban weren't exactly thrilled to host al-Qa'idah once the latter group began to stir up trouble internationally. If a satisfactory diplomatic solution proved to be unobtainable, continued funding for the United Islamic Front and/or targeted assassination of al-Qa'idah leaders should have been considered. A full scale invasion was absolutely the stupidest course of action to take. "Fuck off?" Fuck you.

The taliban itself is a farce... there would be no sensible trial coming from those terror loving, people oppressing motherfuckers.... best thing that could happen is gathering the taliban in and area (as well as people who promote and support them) and clusterbombing them into smoldering embers

The military actions in both Iraq and Afghanistan were BOTH rightful and justified
 
Neither invasion was "wrongful" BOTH were justified. Afghanistan harbored a person that carried out the worst attack on American soil ever.They provided him with safe haven, training areas and materials and supplies, allowing his terrorists to freely enter and exit the Country. When called on to cease and desist they REFUSED.

Iraq was in violation of numerous UN edicts and had routinely VIOLATED the cease fire from the 90 war. All that JUSTIFIED a US response to include an invasion.

Go peddle your lies somewhere else.

You are mistaken about Iraq. The US is not the muscle man for the UN. We were not authorized to take action on its behalf. None of which justified a US response.

Why do you think most of the major Bush foreign policy folks no longer can travel outside of our country? They will be arrested on war crimes warrants.

RETARD ALERT. None of them will be arrested for anything. Or are Spanish, British, Italian, Polish and a host of other Countries diplomats in trouble too?

And we had EVERY right to invade. Further since Congress approved it and something like 40 Countries supported it you haven't a leg to stand on in complaining.

You are flatly wrong. I said we did not have the UN's warrant for invasion. Our invasion was flatly a war crime. The Bush officials have been told what will happen if they travel. Seen any of them traveling?
 
Super.

Glad to see justice has prevailed.

The fact that the Seals themselves opted for Courts martial tells the tale as far as I'm concerned.

I have no doubt the other two will be found NG also.
 
Super.

Glad to see justice has prevailed.

The fact that the Seals themselves opted for Courts martial tells the tale as far as I'm concerned.

I have no doubt the other two will be found NG also.

I suspect the prosecution tried what they believed was the strongest case first. What may happen is that the remaining two (1) will be offered new Captain Mast's proceedings, (2) they will refuse again, and (3) Letters of Reprimand will be placed in the official personnel files.
 

Forum List

Back
Top