another beheading - south korean this time
- Thread starter posol
- Start date
- Replies 30
- Views 2K
We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms
- Status
NotUrAverage_Si
Senior Member
saw it on the news last night...
this needs to end. if I were george bush, my finger would so be hovering over the nuclear missile button.
I've seen the video, it is real.
Anyway, South Koreas reaction should be to send 10,000 troops, and everytime they try to behead someone with a demand, everyone should do exactly the opposite. They want prisoners released? Fuck em, we imprison a hundred more, they want troops out, we send more in.
On a side note, US led Afghanistan soldiers (not US soldiers) beheaded four Al-Coward soldiers a few days ago, because they were involved in the beheading of two other US supported Afghan soldiers (one was a civilian or something).
dohcvtec_accord
WRX Sellout
For real? Link to story/pics/video?
NotUrAverage_Si
Senior Member
http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=903566
It was in the New York Times, also:
NY Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06....html
Quote »
Afghans Behead 4 Taliban
By REUTERS
Published: June 23, 2004
ANDAHAR, Afghanistan, June 22 (Reuters) — Afghan soldiers have beheaded four Taliban fighters in retaliation for the Taliban's beheading of an Afghan soldier and an Afghan interpreter for American-led forces, a government commander said Tuesday.
The soldier and the interpreter were beheaded after becoming separated from a patrol of Afghan and American-led foreign troops in the Arghandab district of the southern province of Zabul on Monday night, Namatullah Tokhi, commander of the government's 27th Division in the province, said in an interview.
Advertisement
He said government troops later captured and killed four Taliban guerrillas in the same way.
"They cut off their heads with a knife," he said of the Taliban action, "so when our forces arrested four Taliban, we cut off their heads too."
Zabul and adjoining southern provinces have been the battleground for deadly clashes between Taliban guerrillas and American-led and government forces since the Taliban were overthrown in late 2001.
Taliban fighters have beheaded government soldiers in the past, but this is the first publicly disclosed time that government forces have retaliated in the same manner, an escalation of a conflict that has claimed hundreds.
The Taliban and their Islamic militant allies, including Al Qaeda, have declared a holy war against American-led forces and consider foreign and local aid workers legitimate targets as well as foreign and government soldiers and officials.
The guerrillas have vowed to disrupt elections planned for September.
In late May, soldiers from the 20,000-member American-led force in Afghanistan began a sweeping campaign against the militants in southern provinces, including Zabul, to improve conditions for the elections.
mother fuckers!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
dohcvtec_accord
WRX Sellout
Originally posted by E_SolSi@Jun 24 2004, 01:08 PM
just saw the video of the beheading
..... damn....
Yeah, it was worse than the other one.
Pave the place...dohcvtec_accord
WRX Sellout
Our soldiers scared the shit out of the prisoners (read: PRISONERS) and humiliated them. Those wastes of human life kill people, usually innocent.
Both are wrong on one level or another.
But don't even try to compare one with the other. It's not even close.
You have to admit, if the Middle East weren't so back-asswards with their religious, social and cultural views, MANY of the problems that are plaguing the world today wouldn't exist. The degredation of women, refusal to move forward with technology, etc. are directly contributing to the animalistic and reactionary politics and actions of the Middle East.
When people like me say things like "Pave it" or "nuke it", of course we're not serious. It's a reaction to the disgusting and backwards principles and policies that people in the Middle East commit every day. The world is moving forward, but many Middle Easterners refuse to go with it. Their jealousy and anger toward a world that's leaving them behind, by their choice, is quite a juxtaposition.
When the people on this board, and in the rest of the country, see the shit that our soldiers and civilians have to put up with over there on a daily basis, we get upset and feel like personally taking a baseball bat to the heads of anyone we can find over there. It's in anger that we suggest things like paving or nuking the country.
So don't get your panties in a wad when someone says something along those lines.
Both are wrong on one level or another.
But don't even try to compare one with the other. It's not even close.
You have to admit, if the Middle East weren't so back-asswards with their religious, social and cultural views, MANY of the problems that are plaguing the world today wouldn't exist. The degredation of women, refusal to move forward with technology, etc. are directly contributing to the animalistic and reactionary politics and actions of the Middle East.
When people like me say things like "Pave it" or "nuke it", of course we're not serious. It's a reaction to the disgusting and backwards principles and policies that people in the Middle East commit every day. The world is moving forward, but many Middle Easterners refuse to go with it. Their jealousy and anger toward a world that's leaving them behind, by their choice, is quite a juxtaposition.
When the people on this board, and in the rest of the country, see the shit that our soldiers and civilians have to put up with over there on a daily basis, we get upset and feel like personally taking a baseball bat to the heads of anyone we can find over there. It's in anger that we suggest things like paving or nuking the country.
So don't get your panties in a wad when someone says something along those lines.
Alright you, that's enough of that, you can blame it on ANYONE, EXCEPT those who are at fault damn it.
Blanco, you're not even worth the time anymore with boring assbackwards rhetoric.
Do you really think that anyone on this board could live with making a descision like that, killing a WHOLE race? It's called a knee jerk reaction, get over it. You don't have to spew forth your anti establishment BS everytime someone has one. Maybe if you stopped letting your hate for the world around you muddle your senses, you'd see that what is going on is well beyand the scope of your narrow vision.
Frankie P.
Senior Member
I just want to say that I say 'nuke the bastards as well. They don't care about people that our civilians over there so why should we? Also we should make the same statement as the US in WWII when we bombed Japan. "Less lives would be lost if we just nuke them." Sounds good to me, less Americans/Civilians would die, therefore we should just nuke the ragheads.
Celerity
Well-Known Member
In the 60's, after the US setup it's interim government and reform in Korea, South Korea was still a bloodbath. It took YEARS to get South Korea to the status it currently enjoys.
And South Korea was our Iraq, 50 years ago.
If we stay in Iraq, and proceed with our efforts, perhaps in 50 years you'll see a free and modern Iraq supporting good (As in opposite of evil) actions in world human rights maneuvers.
If I have used too many big words, lemme reiterate:
South Korea has made a very difficult decision - One that they never bargainned for. They decided to stand strong in the Coalition forces not because of the valiant efforts of strong (And I do mean STRONG) support of England, Japan or even the U.S. They are doing it because they know first hand the kind of life can await Iraq if this new government goes in place, and if the Iraq people are lifted from a totalitarian regime.
-> Steve
Words are still too big. Just grunt if you need help.
And South Korea was our Iraq, 50 years ago.
If we stay in Iraq, and proceed with our efforts, perhaps in 50 years you'll see a free and modern Iraq supporting good (As in opposite of evil) actions in world human rights maneuvers.
If I have used too many big words, lemme reiterate:
South Korea has made a very difficult decision - One that they never bargainned for. They decided to stand strong in the Coalition forces not because of the valiant efforts of strong (And I do mean STRONG) support of England, Japan or even the U.S. They are doing it because they know first hand the kind of life can await Iraq if this new government goes in place, and if the Iraq people are lifted from a totalitarian regime.
-> Steve
Words are still too big. Just grunt if you need help.
Do you even understand the implications of what you are writting? To be sure, with your lack of ability to think critically, i commend you on your ability to even write. beyond that, apply your rationale to the America of the past. A group of Angry white men form a club because they dont like black people and their infiltration into their restrooms/water fountains/swimming pools. They decide to brutally beat and hang a number of strong willed black people, not only as an act of "retribution", but as a warning to black people in the future who may try and defy the status quo. Are you seeing where i am going with this? Basicaly it ends with bombing to shit all white people because of their lack of respect for the lives of humans.
I am honestly sorry that you are not able to discern between the actions of an extremist faction and the general members of the middle eastern populace. In my goal of becoming a teacher in the public education system im hoping to facilitate learning in such a way that all of my students will be able to see the implications of their statements. For the time asking ill simply ask that you think before you make a statement. A "knee-jerk" reaction is no excuse for endorsing genoside of a race based on the actions of extremist groups. Perhaps in a spoken conversation something like that could slide (especially if they recind it later) but we all read these words as we are writting them, and i think that should give us the perspective that we need to give a little thought to what we are writting, and not make rash statements.
- Status