killadoob
Honorary Master
So all the witnesses are lying?
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Which South African brand or product do you wish would make a return?
The Robert Bales - Afghan Massacre Case
So all the witnesses are lying?
who knows
i find it hard to believe there were 20 US soldiers responsible, if they really were on a killing spree they wouldve topped alot more than 16 frags and probably left no witnesses
killadoob
Honorary Master
Perhaps the best thing for you to do is read the article, or at least read the first few lines of the article at the very minimum.
So nivek once again who is lying, nato or all the witnesses interviewed(read the article alf)? Odd how warped the truth can get.
LazyLion
King of de Jungle
Police? Which police? This is an international incident between two countries in a war zone. WTF do the police have to do with it?
And you know very well what I think of the killing of innocent people... any people, so quit trolling.
I do hope whoever is responsible is brought to justice, but I don't hold out much hope.
The US is clearly to blame here, and I don't see much chance of them doing the right thing here.
Regardless of what happens, they have damaged their own reputation beyond repair.
killadoob
Honorary Master
Yet a suicide bomber killing innocent people is not a war situation gary, omg this is so funny.
This is not an international incident, it is straight up without a doubt an act of terror gary, absolutely no difference between a suicide bomber killing americans or americans killing afghans.
Why is a suicide bomber targeting american soldiers called a terrorist but an american soldier killing innocent people on purpose gets called an incident? What kind of logic are we dealing with here?
This was a terrorist act, simple as that and anyone who aided in this attack should be killed or sent to a prison without trial, isn't that how it works gary?
Insane.
This is not an international incident, it is straight up without a doubt an act of terror gary, absolutely no difference between a suicide bomber killing americans or americans killing afghans.
Why is a suicide bomber targeting american soldiers called a terrorist but an american soldier killing innocent people on purpose gets called an incident? What kind of logic are we dealing with here?
This was a terrorist act, simple as that and anyone who aided in this attack should be killed or sent to a prison without trial, isn't that how it works gary?
Insane.
Last edited:
Mephisto_Helix
Resident Postwhore
Whew, strange that Google only returns RT links for this article huh ......... 
killadoob
Honorary Master
Mephesto your googling skillz must suck something horrific bud 
.
It came directly from the afghan news and not RT. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panjwai_shooting_spree although there is no way people will believe afghans over nato, i mean surely nato would not lie to people. O wait
Lino if you don't have anything of interest to say perhaps it's best to just leave the thread alone surely?
O look www.cnn.com is running the story. http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/16/world/asia/afghanistan-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/16/us-afghanistan-idUSBRE82F0PV20120316
OMG another one running the story, what is going on here guys, didn't RT fabricate and lie or something, perhaps the western papers are now also lying and fabricating stories. Perhaps the afghan president is the liar.
.It came directly from the afghan news and not RT. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panjwai_shooting_spree although there is no way people will believe afghans over nato, i mean surely nato would not lie to people. O wait
Lino if you don't have anything of interest to say perhaps it's best to just leave the thread alone surely?
O look www.cnn.com is running the story. http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/16/world/asia/afghanistan-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/16/us-afghanistan-idUSBRE82F0PV20120316
OMG another one running the story, what is going on here guys, didn't RT fabricate and lie or something, perhaps the western papers are now also lying and fabricating stories. Perhaps the afghan president is the liar.
Last edited:
copacetic
King of the Hippies
One lone nut as opposed to a concerted attack by a group, makes for very different stories. One is palatable, although awful, the other is completely unacceptable insanity and barbarism.
*edit*
Not that I'm endorsing one story or the other, I've no clue, haven't even read the article in this thread, it's Friday, could not be arsed.
killadoob
Honorary Master
Right now nato know they can lie and many ignorant people will believe them. So the only evidence they have has been taken out the country and now it's nato vs the afghans and who do you think people will believe without a doubt copa? Nato of course because nato are good and would never lie
. It's like a cult when the west say something bang belief. Even when they are proven to be liars people still believe everything they say.
LazyLion
King of de Jungle
Why are you arguing with me? I never said it wasn't a terrorist attack.
Terrorist attacks can still take place in a war situation.
Jeeezuyz, Killa, even when I am agreeing with you, you still attack me.
Well its going to be a military court so don't expect much. If the US were serious they would have left him to be tried in the same country he committed his crime.
Now the stories making rounds are:
- Saw his fellow soldiers leg blown off
- didn't want to be deployed there in the first place
By the time he is tried, the media would have moved on to something else. slap on the wrists and may be a stay in a nuthouse to overcome PTSD.
Btw original poster is correct this is a terrorist/terrorists,they certainly fit the definition
Vrotappel
Bulls fan
Sounds like BS to me. What's up with the reference to American terrorists? Immediate loss of credibility.
alloytoo
Honorary Master
20 soldiers, 19 victims?
One would imagine that 20 trained soldiers would a) be a bit more efficient b)leave no witnesses. c) use some heavy artillery
One would imagine that 20 trained soldiers would a) be a bit more efficient b)leave no witnesses. c) use some heavy artillery
killadoob
Honorary Master
What should they have been called then just as a matter of interest? The reference was to clearly point out americans were involved in the attack.
Norwegian terrorist stirs multiculturalism opponents
So what would you call that guy?
American soldiers, who they described as laughing and drunk. ...
Hmmm you could be right depending on their level of dronkness
. Most people cannot walk straight let alone shoot straight when they are drunk. Also drinking makes you very sloppy and arrogant. More than likely didn't feel the need to ensure nobody found out, discharged and 3 month suspended sentence sounds pretty sweet. That is basically what the other guy got for murdering innocent people in afghanistan or iraq
Last edited:
Mineer
Expert Member
I am no psychologist, but I think it would be easy to defend 1 guy went crazy story , than 20 guys went crazy at the same time, with a common goal, I might add
LazyLion
King of de Jungle
Mineer
Expert Member
Doesn't really look like the US is planning on defending ANYTHING are they now?
you got a point I suppose
LazyLion
King of de Jungle
and in this case, I am agreeing with you guys that they should face the consequences of this reprehensible action. It is inexcusable. The death of 16 innocent people alone is shocking, but the US actions after the fact are utterly disgusting.
Afghanistan will most likely cease co-operation with the US... and they would be fully justified in doing so.
Most likely Pakistan has already gone that route as well.
They should just rename the US Foreign Policy Manual... call it "How to P!$$ off countries and make enemies of people groups"
Last edited: