U.S. soldier gets 100 years for Iraq rape, killings

[slackerinabox]

He said: "During the time me and Barker were raping Abeer, I heard five or six gunshots that came from the bedroom.

"After Barker was done, Green came out of the bedroom and said that he had killed them all, that all of them were dead."

Cortez added: "Green then placed himself between Abeer's legs to rape her. When Green was finished, he stood up and shot Abeer in the head two or three times."

The entire crime took about five minutes and the girl knew her parents and sister had been shot while she was being raped, the hearing heard.

Animals.. Fvcking animals.. I'm very much against the death penalty but the things they put that poor girl through... Those monsters should all be gutted with a dull knife...

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Answer my question, do you honestly believe that there is any force in the world that could invade us and take away our freedom of speech or whatever the hell it is you're arguing?

Without a military? Just about anyone.

Oh really? What if everyone was armed and we had militias? I highly doubt it.

And there's a use for a military: defending the homeland, not policing the fvcking world. I don't mind having a military as long as it's purpose is to protect america, i mind having a military whose purpose seems to be 'making the world a better place'.

So we shouldn't attack terrorists outside of our borders?

Should we have stayed out of WWII in Europe since Hitler was not an immediate threat?

Tell me, what good is a citizen militia against an airforce? A nuclear threat? ICBMs?

What good is bombing and nuking a country when you eventually have to put troops down on the ground to oppress the population and strip them of their freedoms?

And i'm pro-nukes, they're an excellent deterrent for invasion.

And i'm sorry if you believe we'd be speaking german if we weren't involved in WW2

true we would not be speaking german if we did nto invade. BUT a country that is a strong alie was in trouble. part of being allies is comeing to there aid when needed.

i think its wrong that we even waited so damn long.

Maybe Europe should have thought about that when they were fcking germany in the @$$ post WW1 that led to the rise of hitler. Their problem, too bad, so sad.

Actually, it was the allies INaction that lead to Hitler. It was Germany's aggression in the first place that lead to the treaty of Versailles.

Ah well. Have fun in your little fantasy world there, Phokus. Keep on spitting in the face of those who protect your freedom.

Maybe you should study history a little bit to understand why isolationism doesn't work.

Yes, excluding Germany from the negotiations and forcing excessive reparations had nothing to do with the rise of Hitler. Nothing at all. Yup.

Maybe you should read a little history to understand why interventionism doesn't work. Just ask Britain and how they completely made the M.E. into what we're fighting today.

As for 'spitting in the face', blah blah blah. I'm sick and tired of this P.C. bvllshit when it comes to the military being the highest ideal and beyond reproach.

Germany was the aggressor and therefore responsible for millions of deaths. You don't negotiate with an aggressor. And why shouldn't Germant have paid for their aggression? The reparations post WWII were, and still are MUCH higher.

The ME/UK issue wasn't interventionism, it was colonialism. Who needs to study history?

I didn't say Germany shouldn't have paid reparations... i was criticizing the EXCESSIVE reparations. The amount they had to pay had nothing to do with repaying the damage done, it was about vengeance, especially by the French.

And redrawing the M.E's map isn't interventionism? Wow, that's news to me!

 

[MisterJackson]

So Phokus, you're saying that it wasn't possible (assuming the US didn't involve itself in WWII) for most if not ALL of Europe to be over run and controlled by the Third Reich? Let's say that we sat by as he seized control, expanded his empire and took control of even just a third of Europe with no deterrence from us. Then what? Do you think he'd have been satisfied with that much power and stop???? No, he'd eyeball the US next.

Did you forget that Hitler worked EXTREMELY hard to design long range rockets? With a mindset that eventually he'd develop the tech needed to point and send missles to US soil. Without the scientists that we captured/freed from him we would have had NO space/rocket/missle program when we did. Of course we would have caught up, but we would have been YEARS behind. And when you're talking about that stuff years can spell the difference between life and death.

WWII could have EASILY gone so many different ways. You need to open your eyes, and take your blinders off.

And no, I'm not comparing this current war to WWII.

OP, I am so sorry for contributing to getting this thread so off topic....I'll quit now.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Answer my question, do you honestly believe that there is any force in the world that could invade us and take away our freedom of speech or whatever the hell it is you're arguing?

Without a military? Just about anyone.

Oh really? What if everyone was armed and we had militias? I highly doubt it.

And there's a use for a military: defending the homeland, not policing the fvcking world. I don't mind having a military as long as it's purpose is to protect america, i mind having a military whose purpose seems to be 'making the world a better place'.

So we shouldn't attack terrorists outside of our borders?

Should we have stayed out of WWII in Europe since Hitler was not an immediate threat?

Tell me, what good is a citizen militia against an airforce? A nuclear threat? ICBMs?

What good is bombing and nuking a country when you eventually have to put troops down on the ground to oppress the population and strip them of their freedoms?

And i'm pro-nukes, they're an excellent deterrent for invasion.

And i'm sorry if you believe we'd be speaking german if we weren't involved in WW2

true we would not be speaking german if we did nto invade. BUT a country that is a strong alie was in trouble. part of being allies is comeing to there aid when needed.

i think its wrong that we even waited so damn long.

Maybe Europe should have thought about that when they were fcking germany in the @$$ post WW1 that led to the rise of hitler. Their problem, too bad, so sad.

Actually, it was the allies INaction that lead to Hitler. It was Germany's aggression in the first place that lead to the treaty of Versailles.

Ah well. Have fun in your little fantasy world there, Phokus. Keep on spitting in the face of those who protect your freedom.

Maybe you should study history a little bit to understand why isolationism doesn't work.

Yes, excluding Germany from the negotiations and forcing excessive reparations had nothing to do with the rise of Hitler. Nothing at all. Yup.

Maybe you should read a little history to understand why interventionism doesn't work. Just ask Britain and how they completely made the M.E. into what we're fighting today.

As for 'spitting in the face', blah blah blah. I'm sick and tired of this P.C. bvllshit when it comes to the military being the highest ideal and beyond reproach.

Germany was the aggressor and therefore responsible for millions of deaths. You don't negotiate with an aggressor. And why shouldn't Germant have paid for their aggression? The reparations post WWII were, and still are MUCH higher.

The ME/UK issue wasn't interventionism, it was colonialism. Who needs to study history?

I didn't say Germany shouldn't have paid reparations... i was criticizing the EXCESSIVE reparations. The amount they had to pay had nothing to do with repaying the damage done, it was about vengeance, especially by the French.

And redrawing the M.E's map isn't interventionism? Wow, that's news to me!

It started with colonialism in Egypt and ended with the fall of the Ottoman empire. Order had to be restored. It has nothing to do with what is happening today.

The reparations were NOT excessive. Not considering the damage done. Been reading Mein Kampf lately?

The treaty was NOT enforced as it should have been. If it had, Hitler never would have come to power.

And I'm still loving how you would have opposed entry into WWII.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Answer my question, do you honestly believe that there is any force in the world that could invade us and take away our freedom of speech or whatever the hell it is you're arguing?

Without a military? Just about anyone.

Oh really? What if everyone was armed and we had militias? I highly doubt it.

And there's a use for a military: defending the homeland, not policing the fvcking world. I don't mind having a military as long as it's purpose is to protect america, i mind having a military whose purpose seems to be 'making the world a better place'.

So we shouldn't attack terrorists outside of our borders?

Should we have stayed out of WWII in Europe since Hitler was not an immediate threat?

Tell me, what good is a citizen militia against an airforce? A nuclear threat? ICBMs?

What good is bombing and nuking a country when you eventually have to put troops down on the ground to oppress the population and strip them of their freedoms?

And i'm pro-nukes, they're an excellent deterrent for invasion.

And i'm sorry if you believe we'd be speaking german if we weren't involved in WW2

true we would not be speaking german if we did nto invade. BUT a country that is a strong alie was in trouble. part of being allies is comeing to there aid when needed.

i think its wrong that we even waited so damn long.

Maybe Europe should have thought about that when they were fcking germany in the @$$ post WW1 that led to the rise of hitler. Their problem, too bad, so sad.

Actually, it was the allies INaction that lead to Hitler. It was Germany's aggression in the first place that lead to the treaty of Versailles.

Ah well. Have fun in your little fantasy world there, Phokus. Keep on spitting in the face of those who protect your freedom.

Maybe you should study history a little bit to understand why isolationism doesn't work.

Yes, excluding Germany from the negotiations and forcing excessive reparations had nothing to do with the rise of Hitler. Nothing at all. Yup.

Maybe you should read a little history to understand why interventionism doesn't work. Just ask Britain and how they completely made the M.E. into what we're fighting today.

As for 'spitting in the face', blah blah blah. I'm sick and tired of this P.C. bvllshit when it comes to the military being the highest ideal and beyond reproach.

Germany was the aggressor and therefore responsible for millions of deaths. You don't negotiate with an aggressor. And why shouldn't Germant have paid for their aggression? The reparations post WWII were, and still are MUCH higher.

The ME/UK issue wasn't interventionism, it was colonialism. Who needs to study history?

I didn't say Germany shouldn't have paid reparations... i was criticizing the EXCESSIVE reparations. The amount they had to pay had nothing to do with repaying the damage done, it was about vengeance, especially by the French.

And redrawing the M.E's map isn't interventionism? Wow, that's news to me!

It started with colonialism in Egypt and ended with the fall of the Ottoman empire. Order had to be restored. It has nothing to do with what is happening today.

The reparations were NOT excessive. Not considering the damage done. Been reading Mein Kampf lately?

The treaty was NOT enforced as it should have been. If it had, Hitler never would have come to power.

And I'm still loving how you would have opposed entry into WWII.

Forcing Sunni, Shia, and Kurds into the same country had nothing to do with what's happening today? You're a real piece of work :roll:

As for the mein kampf remark: LOL, godwin's law shines upon thee. I'm not going to argue this point anymore, most historians/economists (except for Keynes and a few others) agree the reparations were excessive and led to the economic disaster (or at least the easy assignability of the blame) which of course led the to humiliation/desperation and rise and acceptance of the aggressive Nationalism of Hitler. Do you think France and the other countries involved in the treaty would've been so vengeful if they knew what would've happened? Again, their fault, too bad, so sad.