Pope's quote/comments on Islam

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

No, these sorry ass motherfuckers engaging in terrorism is the only reason we give a damn about them right now. You aren't going to find anything past or present that excuses or justifies those activities, at least not that is acceptable to rational human beings.

What you don't seem to get -- this isn't some intellectual, philisophical, or spiritual exercise. It's a war.

I really don't give a shit if their mommies were mean to them, if they got their feelings hurt over what somebody said, or if they're ticked off because somebody pissed in the general direction of Mecca.

What matters, the ONLY thing that matters is eliminating them as a threat, by whatever means necessary. And that's a task that would be a lot more likely to be accomplish if so many people weren't foolishly fixated on trying to "understand" the miserable bastards we ought to be eliminating.

If this were 1941, I swear there'd be people trying to figure out a way to ship the freakin' Japanese some oil for free & trying to apologize for any inconvienience we may have caused them in forcing them to bomb Pearl Harbor.

I swear, I read threads like these & I actually understand why the terrorists believe this is a winnable conflict for them.

Jon, being in rural Georgia, your odds of dying from a terrorist attack are about 1 in 1,000,000 or so. Your odds of dying in a drunk driving accident are about 1/180. During the 11 year period from 1990 to 2001, an average of 287 Americans died from terrorism while 617 people died from the weather and 312 people fell of ladders. The weather is twice as likely as a terrorist to kill you.

Does that put any kind of perspective on this 'threat' that you are willing to eliminate by any means necessary, including the wholesale genocide of millions of people?

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

Jon, being in rural Georgia, your odds of dying from a terrorist attack are about 1 in 1,000,000 or so. Your odds of dying in a drunk driving accident are about 1/180. During the 11 year period from 1990 to 2001, an average of 287 Americans died from terrorism while 617 people died from the weather and 312 people fell of ladders. The weather is twice as likely as a terrorist to kill you.

Does that put any kind of perspective on this 'threat' that you are willing to eliminate by any means necessary, including the wholesale genocide of millions of people?

So it's ok to allow them to kill innocent people because their average is low? C'mon now, you'll have to do better than that.

1 American dead by these monsters is one too many.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

This is the politically correct thing to say, and the same sentiment being echoed by politicians and others, but if you closely examine Islam as a religion, and the Koran as it's "Bible", you'll see that it really isn't the case of a a few bad eggs, or a few rotten tomatoes. Islam as a religion DOES in fact preach violence and DOES in fact encourage it against infadels. Here is a poll number to give you an idea of what I'm talking about, and to in essence show you the plans Islamos have for the future, and how the plan to root themselves within western democracy. (It's funny, it was the Solviets who told the U.S. they would "take us over from within") 44 percent of Muslims living in London say they felt the attacks on the London subways were "warranted." 44 PERCENT!!! .....Now these are supposed to be westernized muslims who are supposedly less secular and perhaps even life long residents of the UK. Yet 44 percent of them STILL felt the bombings were justified. Now I don't know how much stock we can always put in poll numbers, but I will admit that is scary!! So, when you say it's a few bad people making an otherwise peaceful religion look bad, I really think you might want to do some more historical (and contemporary) research. This just isn't the case, but it's what you will hear every politician say in order as not to offend anyone.(simply because politicians today have no balls) So it's really a case of: "if you repeat a lie long enough, eventually it becomes truth."

I just caught this one:

PSUColonel: I would agree with you, but if I came out and said "Islam is evil", someone would bitch and I'd probably get boxed.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

THE MOST POWERFUL CHRISTIAN IN THE WORLD INVADED A COUNTRY WITH A FAULTY CASUS BELLI AND KILLED TENS OF THOUSANDS OF MUSLIMS.

The only Jewish nation killed hundreds of Lebanese civilians in a recent conflict.

Why is this ignored by people? If you count up the number of Christians killed by Muslims and Muslims killed by Christians/Jews in this century, the latter number will be far, far higher. How can you call Muslims a violent people and not say the same about Christians?

First of all, not all of the casus belli (I thought this was spelled differently) were faulty, and you can really only make such a statement with 20/20 hindsight. That isn't even the most ridiculous statement you make. Tens of thousands? huh? American force was no where near that lethal to civilians.

Yes Israel killed civilians during their little foray into Lebanon. The civilians weren't targetted as a political maneuver. They weren't even targetted. Not to mention that the incursion into Lebanon was prompted by millitary attacks launched from there. There is lots of violence aimed at civilians today in the name of Islam. The same can't be said about Christians, and I'd argue not even Jews. I doubt there is any room for us to agree on that point.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

Why is anything done by a Muslim seen as condemning the entire religion, while anything done by a Christian doesn't reflect on their religion at all? How is random riots and suicide bombings any more violent than militarily bombing, invading, and occupying a country?

I honestly can't fathom that you can't tell the difference.

[Brillig]

Soooo.... how many Americans have to die in that wretched part of the world because "1 Amercan dead" was too many?

And once we kill one innocent civilian on their side, why shouldn't they come after all of us, because "1 Iraqi dead" was too many?

I know thinking about consequences is out of vogue, but you might want to try it some time.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

1 American dead by these monsters is one too many.

Not for a lot of people it isn't ... which is really the whole friggin problem

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I honestly can't fathom that you can't tell the difference.

I actually think he can tell the difference, I think he argues for sport rather than out of any conviction or curiosity.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

No, these sorry ass motherfuckers engaging in terrorism is the only reason we give a damn about them right now. You aren't going to find anything past or present that excuses or justifies those activities, at least not that is acceptable to rational human beings.

What you don't seem to get -- this isn't some intellectual, philisophical, or spiritual exercise. It's a war.

I really don't give a shit if their mommies were mean to them, if they got their feelings hurt over what somebody said, or if they're ticked off because somebody pissed in the general direction of Mecca.

What matters, the ONLY thing that matters is eliminating them as a threat, by whatever means necessary. And that's a task that would be a lot more likely to be accomplish if so many people weren't foolishly fixated on trying to "understand" the miserable bastards we ought to be eliminating.

If this were 1941, I swear there'd be people trying to figure out a way to ship the freakin' Japanese some oil for free & trying to apologize for any inconvienience we may have caused them in forcing them to bomb Pearl Harbor.

I swear, I read threads like these & I actually understand why the terrorists believe this is a winnable conflict for them.

Wow, more evidence of how Christianity has "evolved" since the Middle Ages. How are you different than those you deem "miserable bastards", Jon?

What you don't seem to get is that while this is war, there is a reason behind their actions. The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor for a reason, not because it seemed like it would be cool. September 11th happened for a reason, not because some extremists were bored and had nothing else to do. These people are motivated by something and the only way to defeat them is to understand their motives. You can bomb the hell out of them if you want, but that's only going to make matters worse. This is not a conflict we can win with our mighty military, which is exactly why they are fighting the way they are.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by Brillig

Soooo.... how many Americans have to die in that wretched part of the world because "1 Amercan dead" was too many?

And once we kill one innocent civilian on their side, why shouldn't they come after all of us, because "1 Iraqi dead" was too many?

I know thinking about consequences is out of vogue, but you might want to try it some time.

First, I couldn't care two cents about their perspective. They started this. We should finish it, and if that means Iraqi civilians die, then they're gonna die.

Secondly, WE ARE NOT IN IRAQ BECAUSE THEY ARE MUSLIMS THERE. That's the difference. We're not out to kill innocents AT ALL, and more than one American soldier has died defending innocent Iraqis from their own people.

But, you're right about consequences ... there are consequences for killing over 2,000 Americans in an attack. If this had happened during the 40's or 50's, there would be no discussion, no argument, we would have our justice. Far too many people have a desire to "understand" our enemy rather than eliminating them.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

First, I couldn't care two cents about their perspective. They started this. We should finish it, and if that means Iraqi civilians die, then they're gonna die.

The Iraqis started this???

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

Wow, more evidence of how Christianity has "evolved" since the Middle Ages. How are you different than those you deem "miserable bastards", Jon?

What you don't seem to get is that while this is war, there is a reason behind their actions. The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor for a reason, not because it seemed like it would be cool.

I've read quite a bit about Pearl Harbor, and I don't remember FDR or the American general populace saying "Gee, maybe we shouldn't go to war with Japan right now. We should understand why they attacked us and empathize with their situation". No, we went after them immediately and without hesitation.

September 11th happened for a reason, not because some extremists were bored and had nothing else to do. These people are motivated by something and the only way to defeat them is to understand their motives.

Actually, the only way to defeat them is to kill them. Motives be damned. I DO NOT CARE WHY THEY KILLED AMERICANS. I only care that they did. I'm sure Americans in 1942 could not give one damn why Japan attacked us. Same situation applies now.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

The Iraqis started this???

In a single word: Yes.

[-Mojo Jojo-]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

The Iraqis started this???

Well obviously...

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

Wow, more evidence of how Christianity has "evolved" since the Middle Ages.

See, that isn't the conversation topic, although damned if you don't seem determined to try to make it so.

How are you different than those you deem "miserable bastards", Jon?

Gee, lemme check. I haven't bombed a cafe in a while. I haven't beheaded anybody in ages. Lord knows (irony intended, btw) it isn't for the lack of wanting to.

What you don't seem to get is that while this is war, there is a reason behind their actions.

And what you don't seem to be getting is that I really don't give a flying fuck what reason they think they have. Once you go flying planes into buildings, I run out of giveashit really quickly. I'm funny like that I guess.

These people are motivated by something and the only way to defeat them is to understand their motives.

Tell you what. You sit over there on the side & contemplate, or better yet, go over there & have a nice long cup of hot tea with them & discuss it. But please stay the hell out of the way of the people who have the slightest friggin clue how to deal with them properly.

This is not a conflict we can win with our mighty military, which is exactly why they are fighting the way they are.

Oh, it could be. The question that remains to be answered is whether we have the courage & wisdom to make that happen.

[st.cronin]

I don't think the Iraqis started it. Personally, I blame the Babylonians.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

But, you're right about consequences ... there are consequences for killing over 2,000 Americans in an attack. If this had happened during the 40's or 50's, there would be no discussion, no argument, we would have our justice. Far too many people have a desire to "understand" our enemy rather than eliminating them.

I'm all for going after those responsible for September 11. I'm pretty sure everyone is. So let's go get them! Um, where are they? Afghanistan? Iran? Pakistan? Never mind, let's go get Saddam instead!

There's a huge difference between conflicts in the 40's and 50's. If the Soviet Union had attacked us, there would have been an easy target to go against since they were a nation. But Al Qaeda isn't a government, they're an organization, so why respond to them like a state? How is the military going to take down an international organization? Why not go after them like other criminal organizations, like the Mafia?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

The Iraqis started this???

Oh, silly us.

We're supposed to wait until they kill hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands.

And then, naturally, we're supposed to just "understand" that too.

Gosh, what ever was I thinking?

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

So, getting back to the original topic, which was the Pope's comments...

Reading through the text of the speech, it really does seem to be aimed at his theological enemies, rather than the Islamic community. There is a theological movement in the Catholic church that aims to strip the Greek philosophical influences that have been superimposed on Old Testament and Jesus' core teachings. Personally I have mixed feelings on this, on one hand, Greek translations have no doubt clouded some of the original intent and meaning of the Hebrew sources, on the other hand, the early Christian Church did spring forth in a Hellenic context. Leaving that debate aside, the pope has traditionally been a staunch detractor of this movement, and this speech seems primarily an opportunity to continue the attack.

If there is any "culture war" fodder in the speech, it actually seems to be aimed at the west. The potshot he takes at scientific positivism is telling. If this is his attempt to revive the fortunes of Christianity in Western Europe from the continued sinking into irrelevance (as some commentators suspect), perhaps he should go back to the drawing board...

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Klinglerware

Reading through the text of the speech, it really does seem to be aimed at his theological enemies, rather than the Islamic community. There is a theological movement in the Catholic church that aims to strip the Greek philosophical influences that have been superimposed on Old Testament and Jesus' core teachings. Personally I have mixed feelings on this, on one hand, Greek translations have no doubt clouded some of the original intent and meaning of the Hebrew sources, on the other hand, the early Christian Church did spring forth in a Hellenic context. Leaving that debate aside, the pope has traditionally been a staunch detractor of this movement, and this speech seems primarily an opportunity to continue the attack.

If there is any "culture war" fodder in the speech, it actually seems to be aimed at the west. The potshot he takes at scientific positivism is telling. If this is his attempt to revive the fortunes of Christianity in Western Europe from the continued sinking into irrelevance (as some commentators suspect), perhaps he should go back to the drawing board...

yes yes yes

My argument all along has been that the violence has nothing whatsoever to do with WHAT the Pope said, but rather that the Pope said something that the religious leaders in the Mideast can use to play their little games.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

Actually, the only way to defeat them is to kill them. Motives be damned. I DO NOT CARE WHY THEY KILLED AMERICANS. I only care that they did. I'm sure Americans in 1942 could not give one damn why Japan attacked us. Same situation applies now.

Good luck killing every terrorist in the world. That should keep you busy for, well, how about forever?

[-Mojo Jojo-]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

I've read quite a bit about Pearl Harbor, and I don't remember FDR or the American general populace saying "Gee, maybe we shouldn't go to war with Japan right now. We should understand why they attacked us and empathize with their situation". No, we went after them immediately and without hesitation.

Actually, the only way to defeat them is to kill them. Motives be damned. I DO NOT CARE WHY THEY KILLED AMERICANS. I only care that they did. I'm sure Americans in 1942 could not give one damn why Japan attacked us. Same situation applies now.

And who are the Japanese in this story?

[MalcPow]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

Wow, more evidence of how Christianity has "evolved" since the Middle Ages. How are you different than those you deem "miserable bastards", Jon?

What you don't seem to get is that while this is war, there is a reason behind their actions. The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor for a reason, not because it seemed like it would be cool. September 11th happened for a reason, not because some extremists were bored and had nothing else to do. These people are motivated by something and the only way to defeat them is to understand their motives. You can bomb the hell out of them if you want, but that's only going to make matters worse. This is not a conflict we can win with our mighty military, which is exactly why they are fighting the way they are.

The counter point to that is we understand their motivation pretty well, for a lot of them it's simply to kill Americans or destroy the West. There are some serious cultural and social deficiencies that contribute to the creation of people like that, and we'd love to try to deal with those underlying issues of poverty, oppression, and incredible class discrepancies. But... the people that blow themselves up are usually just pissed, disaffected, hateful, you name it, a cup of coffee and a bj ain't gonna make them like us, and we better do what we can to keep them from killing us. Which basically amounts to playing cop in Iraq for awhile, trying to help them build democratic institutions, and killing the people that attack our/their troops. Lather, rinse, repeat if we have to in other places. I agree there needs to be some carrot, but right now we need a lot of stick too.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

See, that isn't the conversation topic, although damned if you don't seem determined to try to make it so.

Hypocrite Christians isn't the topic here?

Gee, lemme check. I haven't bombed a cafe in a while. I haven't beheaded anybody in ages. Lord knows (irony intended, btw) it isn't for the lack of wanting to.

So the only reason you haven't done the same actions as these "bastards" is because of lack of opportunity?

Tell you what. You sit over there on the side & contemplate, or better yet, go over there & have a nice long cup of hot tea with them & discuss it. But please stay the hell out of the way of the people who have the slightest friggin clue how to deal with them properly.

I'll tell you what. Instead of sitting over here spouting all your nonsense about how we have to kill them all, why don't you sign up and serve over there? Better yet, become a mercenary.

And please be so kind as to tell me who it is that has the "slightest friggin clue how to deal with" these people. The ones in charge of the government now? Hahahaha. That's a good one. They've sure done a great job the last five years.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

I'll tell you what. Instead of sitting over here spouting all your nonsense about how we have to kill them all, why don't you sign up and serve over there? Better yet, become a mercenary.

I've served my time in the military. I also served in the middle east. Have you?

And please be so kind as to tell me who it is that has the "slightest friggin clue how to deal with" these people. The ones in charge of the government now? Hahahaha. That's a good one. They've sure done a great job the last five years.

They would if it wasn't for people constantly trying to block any reasonable action to try and catch them, saying the terrorists are entitled to civil liberties (which is nonsense anyway).

An unhindered military can accomplish much more than one limited by people who've never bothered to serve their country, and haven't a clue what is needed to do so.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Oh, silly us.

We're supposed to wait until they kill hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands.

And then, naturally, we're supposed to just "understand" that too.

Gosh, what ever was I thinking?

Yes, because they were such a threat to us before we invaded. A nation that saw at least 400,000 children die due to United Nations sanctions, had basically no air force, no WMD programs, and was overrun in a matter of weeks. Yeah, that's a threat.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I actually think he can tell the difference, I think he argues for sport rather than out of any conviction or curiosity.

st.cronin, thanks for providing a textbook example of trolling.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

The Iraqis started this???

Of course they did! They should know better than to be on top of OUR oil!

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by MalcPow

The counter point to that is we understand their motivation pretty well, for a lot of them it's simply to kill Americans or destroy the West. There are some serious cultural and social deficiencies that contribute to the creation of people like that, and we'd love to try to deal with those underlying issues of poverty, oppression, and incredible class discrepancies. But... the people that blow themselves up are usually just pissed, disaffected, hateful, you name it, a cup of coffee and a bj ain't gonna make them like us, and we better do what we can to keep them from killing us. Which basically amounts to playing cop in Iraq for awhile, trying to help them build democratic institutions, and killing the people that attack our/their troops. Lather, rinse, repeat if we have to in other places. I agree there needs to be some carrot, but right now we need a lot of stick too.

I agree that we are never going to win over the extremists. The only way we can win is to prevent them from gaining any more recruits. That's where the carrot comes in. Unfortunately, right now it is nothing but stick, stick, and more stick. Where's the carrot?

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by Brillig

Soooo.... how many Americans have to die in that wretched part of the world because "1 Amercan dead" was too many?

And once we kill one innocent civilian on their side, why shouldn't they come after all of us, because "1 Iraqi dead" was too many?

Brillig, great post. WVUFAN fails to see that his same attitude is part of the reason WHY we are being attacked.

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

First, I couldn't care two cents about their perspective. They started this. We should finish it, and if that means Iraqi civilians die, then they're gonna die.

Secondly, WE ARE NOT IN IRAQ BECAUSE THEY ARE MUSLIMS THERE. That's the difference. We're not out to kill innocents AT ALL, and more than one American soldier has died defending innocent Iraqis from their own people.

Shorter WVUFAN: "I'm not out to kill innocent people, I just don't care if it happens, which makes me infinitely better than the evil Muslims."

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

So the only reason you haven't done the same actions as these "bastards" is because of lack of opportunity?

Sigh. Trust me, it isn't lack of opportunity (since they aren't the only people that generate a motivation).

They've sure done a great job the last five years.

Sadly, they haven't done as good a job as they could or should have. Alas, they've fallen victim to trying to appease people like you.
Fuck me, that isn't sad, it's downright tragic.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by MalcPow

The counter point to that is we understand their motivation pretty well, for a lot of them it's simply to kill Americans or destroy the West. There are some serious cultural and social deficiencies that contribute to the creation of people like that, and we'd love to try to deal with those underlying issues of poverty, oppression, and incredible class discrepancies. But... the people that blow themselves up are usually just pissed, disaffected, hateful, you name it, a cup of coffee and a bj ain't gonna make them like us, and we better do what we can to keep them from killing us. Which basically amounts to playing cop in Iraq for awhile, trying to help them build democratic institutions, and killing the people that attack our/their troops. Lather, rinse, repeat if we have to in other places. I agree there needs to be some carrot, but right now we need a lot of stick too.

I think this is a responsible way to address terrorism. We need teams on the ground, we need better intelligence, we need to bring to justice those that have violated the law. Invading and occupying doesn't help those goals. Attacking Iran doesn't help those goals. Killing a majority of the Muslims in any given area doesn't help those goals.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

I've served my time in the military. I also served in the middle east. Have you?

??? Am I the one advocating killing everyone? Am I the one calling for more bloodshed?

They would if it wasn't for people constantly trying to block any reasonable action to try and catch them, saying the terrorists are entitled to civil liberties (which is nonsense anyway).

I see. If a terrorist tortures someone, it's evil and wrong and we should kill them all. When an American does it, it's good. Nice double standard.

An unhindered military can accomplish much more than one limited by people who've never bothered to serve their country, and haven't a clue what is needed to do so.

I think I've heard this before. Let's see, where? Oh, I know! A little place called Nazi Germany. Heard of it? They sure had a solution (get it?) to those that they viewed as their enemies.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Sadly, they haven't done as good a job as they could or should have. Alas, they've fallen victim to trying to appease people like you.
Fuck me, that isn't sad, it's downright tragic.

You're not seriously saying that Bush and company have done anything to appease people like me? That's the funniest thing I've heard all day.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Sadly, they haven't done as good a job as they could or should have. Alas, they've fallen victim to trying to appease people like you.
Fuck me, that isn't sad, it's downright tragic.

You hear that Jonathan? The problem with the Bush administration and the Republican congress is that it caters to liberals too much!!!

Damn you Liberal Bush! Damn you Liberal Rove! Damn you Liberal DeLay!!! Daaaaaamn youuuuuuuu!!!

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

Shorter WVUFAN: "I'm not out to kill innocent people, I just don't care if it happens, which makes me infinitely better than the evil Muslims."

No, it's more like "do what you want to on your own land, but when you invade my space or hurt my people or my friends, you suffer the consequences".

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik;1252029I

see. If a terrorist tortures someone, it's evil and wrong and we should kill them all. When an American does it, it's good. Nice double standard.

I don't remember Americans beheading innocent Iraqis.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

No, it's more like "do what you want to on your own land, but when you invade my space or hurt my people or my friends, you suffer the consequences".

Wait... can someone remind me what Iraq did to hurt WVUFAN's people and friends? Apart from getting invaded, that is? Was it those crafty Iraq folks that flew planes in to the WTC? Or was it those WMDs (my fave acronym of the last decade) that are still hidden in the country somewhere?

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

I don't remember Americans beheading innocent Iraqis.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,212078,00.html

Court-Martial Recommended for 4 U.S. Soldiers in Iraq Rape-Slay Case

BAGHDAD, Iraq — A U.S. Army investigator has recommended that four American soldiers who face charges in connection with the rape and killing of 14-year-old girl and the killing of her family face a court-martial, a lawyer in the case confirmed on Monday.

Col. Dwight Warren, the investigator in the case, said in a report issued Sunday that "reasonable grounds exist to believe that each of the accused committed the offense for which he is charged."

The report was given to lawyers in the case and obtained by The Associated Press from David Sheldon, the lawyer of one of the defendants..

The four soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division are charged with raping Abeer Qassim al-Janabi in her family's home in Mahmoudiya, about 20 miles south of Baghdad, then killing her along with her parents and her younger sister. Military prosecutors say the four set the teenager's body on fire in order to hide their crime.

The soldiers accused of rape and murder — Spc. James P. Barker, Sgt. Paul E. Cortez, Pfc. Jesse V. Spielman and Pfc. Bryan L. Howard — could potentially face the death penalty. Another soldier, Sgt. Anthony W. Yribe, is accused of failing to report the attack but is not alleged to have been a direct participant.

Another soldier who was said to have allegedly planned the attack, Pfc. Steven D. Green, was discharged from the army due to a "personality disorder" before the allegations became known. He was arrested in June shortly after the allegations became known. He has pleaded not guilty to rape and murder charges and is being held in a civilian court in the United States.

Sheldon, who is counsel to Barker, said the soldiers were essentially abandoned by a military command that did not give them the support that they needed, either in the field or in the courtroom.

"I'm not surprised given the events in this case. It was apparent that neither Spc. Barker nor any of the other soldiers were going to get a fair hearing," Sheldon told the AP. He added that he would be filing an objection within the five days allowed after he received the recommendation from the investigator.

Mahmoudiya is an extremely violent region of Iraq within an area known as the "triangle of death" for the numerous attacks by insurgents, and lawyers are expected to use extreme combat stress as a defense.

Testimony in early August during the soldiers' Article 32 hearing — similar to a civilian grand jury hearing — painted a picture of a unit that was almost constantly on edge from repeated attacks and demoralized by the loss of fellow soldiers.

Sheldon said that in his reply to the investigator's recommendations, he would argue that Warren did not take into account the extenuating circumstances of where the soldiers were serving.

"Each one of these soldiers had experienced extreme combat distress," Sheldon said.

In his report, the army investigator did not make a recommendation on whether the accused should face the death penalty, but he outlined a number of aggravating factors that could be considered.

"I believe evidence exists that the actions of the accused could have created a grave risk of substantial damage to the mission of the United States, and that substantial damage to the national security might have resulted," Warren wrote.

The allegations of rape and murder have bolstered Iraqi accusations of misconduct by soldiers, including illegal killings, beatings and inhuman treatment. The allegations have increased the mistrust and resentment among Iraqis of the American military and increased calls for their withdrawal.

[yabanci]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,212078,00.html

give me a break, gang raping a 14 year-old girl, shooting her, lighting her on fire, and shooting her mother, father, and 5 year-old sister is NOT a beheading.













/sarcasm

[MrBigglesworth]

WVUFAN, you previously said:

Yes, if I were President, I'd get the heck out of from Iraq. They don't want us there, and it's not worth any more American lives. In my opinion, the Iraqi people are just not worth it. If that makes me evil, so be it.

So when did your feelings change? Why must we now stay, and, I'm assuming, go to more places and kill people?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by yabanci

give me a break, gang raping a 14 year-old girl, shooting her, lighting her on fire, and shooting her mother, father, and 5 year-old sister is NOT a beheading.

/sarcasm

I don't care on which side of this argument you fall, if you didn't laugh out loud at this post, you're taking this thread way too seriously.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Drake

I don't care on which side of this argument you fall, if you didn't laugh out loud at this post, you're taking this thread way too seriously.

I agree with this post.

I don't think the analogy is particulary apt, though. The soldiers who did that are going to jail for a long time, and may face the death penalty.

The Islamic Extremists who perpetrate such deeds are considered heroes. So much for that comparison.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I don't think the Iraqis started it. Personally, I blame the Babylonians.

I always confuse them with the Assyrians.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

I don't remember Americans beheading innocent Iraqis.

I'm sorry? I didn't say anything about beheading people. I was talking about torture.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I agree with this post.

I don't think the analogy is particulary apt, though. The soldiers who did that are going to jail for a long time, and may face the death penalty.

The Islamic Extremists who perpetrate such deeds are considered heroes. So much for that comparison.

Sad to say, I'm sure that there are those in America (hell, even those in this thread) that would applaud the same things that Islamic extremists do if those actions were being carried out by American soldiers.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I don't think the analogy is particulary apt, though. The soldiers who did that are going to jail for a long time, and may face the death penalty.

The Islamic Extremists who perpetrate such deeds are considered heroes. So much for that comparison.

True, but the powers that be did try to cover it up, and discharged the main perpetrator quietly. There was a somewhat reasonable chance that they could have gotten off scot free if later incidents hadn't taken place...

[CraigSca]

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I don't think the analogy is particulary apt, though. The soldiers who did that are going to jail for a long time, and may face the death penalty.

The Islamic Extremists who perpetrate such deeds are considered heroes. So much for that comparison.

That's not the point of the comparison at all.

WVUFan said that he's OK with torturing the "terrorists" because the US are more humane than they are and don't go around slaughtering innocent citizens in barbaric fashion like they do.

That case is one example that's come to light saying otherwise.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I always confuse them with the Assyrians.

I always confuse them with the Hittites!