Killing Terrorists Less Troublesome than Burning their Books

[Call to power]

The US would amend the Constitution to allow Arnold Schwarzenegger to be president so he could buff up and win the world for us.

Peace in are time.

It would be interesting to see how the Authoritarian girly-men hope to fight such a force, maybe with a man like Ivan Drago?

you should kill terrorists

why?

i hate all terrorists, be they muslim, christian, hindu or atheist, it doesnt matter.

Well you see the thing is that starts to get a little silly in the context of things like the Algerian war of independence

[EnragedMaldivians]

you should kill terrorists

why?

Why not?

It's the convenient thing to do, especially when they're elusive to capture.

[Call to power]

Why not?

Needless killing is wrong etc.

[EnragedMaldivians]

Why not?

Needless killing is wrong etc.

It's not always needless. Killing certain terrorists can be immensely beneficial, especially if the group is organized around one or a few charismatic figures. The Sri Lankan army certainly weren't the "good guys" what with their eventual opting for a strategy of Tamil ethnic cleansing, but LTTE resistance would probably have collapsed a lot sooner had they got Prabhakaran earlier on, and Sri Lanka would have been better off for it.

[You-Gi-Owe]

I LIKE "Cold War".

And there you have it folks, YGO is a bumder who wants to see world leaders face off in a homoerotic workout session.

Who was your first man crush?

I'm talking about the guilty being sentenced for their crimes.

Aye but if you want to play it like this you have to put it in the books that everyone gets a fatwa for drawing the Koran which er...oddly means that yes American soldiers get killed by an angry mob.

What I'm trying to get at though is our nations constitutions are born out of the interpretation that all men are equal under the law and this is particularly important given the influence of the star chamber upon the background of the US constitution.

Doing a little baiting, are we?

"The Great Satan" pretty much already has a fatwah against it. But really, should muslims actually "know" not to deface a Koran? Isn't it worse if they do it?

I know what a Star chamber is, but it seems so out of context.

[Ovisterra]

People in Afghanistan are still rioting and being killed because U.S. military forces burn some copies of the Koran that the were believed had been notated to pass secret messages between Islamic prisoners.

Meanwhile, in Pakistan, Osama bin Laden's old house is being demolished. I'm surprised it didn't become a shrine to a fallen matyr. But, in retrospect, and I've heard, that the typical middle-eastern mind set respects strength, so they'll happily get rid of anything that reminds them of their failure to protect their once leader.

Rather than continuously apologizing to the Islamic world and looking weak, President Obama should say that he was destroying those books because they'd been desecrated by terrorists. Maybe we ought to have sent them to a type of courts martial panel by U.S. Military Islamic Chaplains for writing in their Korans?

What do you think?

You think everyone in the Middle East had or considered bin Laden as their leader?

[Big Jim P]

You are allowed to weigh it down and put it in a river.

Really? I thought that was just cats..

What, and waste good food?

[Ceannairceach]

People in Afghanistan are still rioting and being killed because U.S. military forces burn some copies of the Koran that the were believed had been notated to pass secret messages between Islamic prisoners.

Really, regardless of what the context was, burning those books was a shitty idea. What kind of idiot who serves in Afghanistan doesn't know what a Koran looks like? Do they need big stickers on them that read "THIS IS THE ISLAMIC HOLY BOOK! WARNING: NOT FIRE RESISTANT!" for them to get the fucking point? And, to continue, burning books is a shitty idea no matter the content. For all they knew, it could have contained information that could supplement their own at a later date. But where did the books go, the commander wonders? To the fiery pits of Tartarus, that's where, due to idiotic policies regarding book disposal. A shelf works too, people.

Meanwhile, in Pakistan, Osama bin Laden's old house is being demolished. I'm surprised it didn't become a shrine to a fallen matyr. But, in retrospect, and I've heard, that the typical middle-eastern mind set respects strength, so they'll happily get rid of anything that reminds them of their failure to protect their once leader.

Oh, insulting Pakistan now. And I thought you couldn't go lower. Hint: Osama was not the leader of Pakistan, nor any place in Pakistan. Considering interviews with the locals has us believing that no one had any idea who was in the compound, I find your bullshit unamusing.

Rather than continuously apologizing to the Islamic world and looking weak, President Obama should say that he was destroying those books because they'd been desecrated by terrorists. Maybe we ought to have sent them to a type of courts martial panel by U.S. Military Islamic Chaplains for writing in their Korans?

That might be a good idea, but I doubt anyone would buy it. And, if he did, you'd just call him out for lying and making up stories. And don't say you wouldn't.

What do you think?

I think you're a sensationalist, modern yellow journalist with to much time on his hands.

[Gravlen]

People in Afghanistan are still rioting and being killed because U.S. military forces burn some copies of the Koran that the were believed had been notated to pass secret messages between Islamic prisoners.

Meanwhile, in Pakistan, Osama bin Laden's old house is being demolished. I'm surprised it didn't become a shrine to a fallen matyr. But, in retrospect, and I've heard, that the typical middle-eastern mind set respects strength, so they'll happily get rid of anything that reminds them of their failure to protect their once leader.

Rather than continuously apologizing to the Islamic world and looking weak, President Obama should say that he was destroying those books because they'd been desecrated by terrorists. Maybe we ought to have sent them to a type of courts martial panel by U.S. Military Islamic Chaplains for writing in their Korans?

What do you think?

I think you don't know what a Fatwa is.

I don't think you're aware that Afghanistan and Pakistan are outside the middle east.

I agree with Gen. David Petraeus that the situation being what it is, mishandling the Koran (intentionally or otherwise) might place US servicemen and -women at risk. I think an apology helps defuse the situation somewhat.

I think former president Bush was right to apologize in 2008 as well. I don't think that made him look weak, nor do I think this apology made Obama look weak.

[Gravlen]

who attack us

us personally

hell, just yesterd-

Are you going to argue that Muslims make a distinction between soldiers and civilians when they attack?

Are you saying that US soldiers who happen to be muslims are all war criminals?

[EnragedMaldivians]

People in Afghanistan are still rioting and being killed because U.S. military forces burn some copies of the Koran that the were believed had been notated to pass secret messages between Islamic prisoners.

Meanwhile, in Pakistan, Osama bin Laden's old house is being demolished. I'm surprised it didn't become a shrine to a fallen matyr. But, in retrospect, and I've heard, that the typical middle-eastern mind set respects strength, so they'll happily get rid of anything that reminds them of their failure to protect their once leader.

Rather than continuously apologizing to the Islamic world and looking weak, President Obama should say that he was destroying those books because they'd been desecrated by terrorists. Maybe we ought to have sent them to a type of courts martial panel by U.S. Military Islamic Chaplains for writing in their Korans?

What do you think?

I agree with Gen. David Petraeus that the situation being what it is, mishandling the Koran (intentionally or otherwise) might place US servicemen and -women at risk. I think an apology helps defuse the situation somewhat.

I think former president Bush was right to apologize in 2008 as well. I don't think that made him look weak, nor do I think this apology made Obama look weak.

I think that's what some people aren't getting; an apology in this context isn't an expression of sincere contrition, but the pragmatic thing to do, as opposed to a short-sighted indulgence of self righteous indignation to the detriment of policy objectives and safety of personnel.

My view is that the protestors are douchebags; Obama is right to apologize, but wrong to mean it.

[Conserative Morality]

Is this kind of thinly veiled racism what passes for objections from the right-wing of society these days?

[Risottia]

President Obama should say that he was destroying those books because they'd been desecrated by terrorists.

You know, weird enough, but this idea actually makes more sense than what the US military actually do by half-assing the whole business...

Maybe we ought to have sent them to a type of courts martial panel by U.S. Military Islamic Chaplains for writing in their Korans?
What do you think?

Well, at least consulting a US military Islamic Chaplain about a respectful method of disposing of copies of Quran might have been an idea.

[EretzIsrael]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/world/asia/koran-burning-in-afghanistan-prompts-second-day-of-protests.html

“This is not just about dishonoring the Koran, it is about disrespecting our dead and killing our children,” said Maruf Hotak, 60, a man who joined the crowd on the outskirts of Kabul, referring to an episode in Helmand Province when American Marines urinated on the dead bodies of men they described as insurgents and to a recent erroneous airstrike on civilians in Kapisa Province that killed eight young Afghans.

“They always admit their mistakes,” he said. “They burn our Koran and then they apologize. You can’t just disrespect our holy book and kill our innocent children and make a small apology.”

[Cirakai]

Hm, well, first of all, I am inclined to look with pity upon any who would use the word "terrorist" in an actual discussion. It is a bullshit word and it should never be used. If a person murders 3.000 people at once, that person is a MASS MURDERER - his reasons for doing what he does is completely irrelevant. It is either legal for him to kill those people or it is illegal for him to murder them. (See what I did there?) Calling him a terrorist instead of a mass-murderer:

1. Confuses people with some new label that does not make sense. Everyone fears and condemns a mass-murderer. What about a terrorist? I don't even know what that means. Scaaaary. Better to accept the government taking my rights away than having to deal with ANOTHER thing that can kill me.

2. Pisses on every single victim of said "terrorist" as they are reduced from now-dead human victims of a heinous crime to a vehicle for a political message.

3. FFS know history - or even better know trends:

3a. The ancient jewish kings pointed a finger, said the word, "ha-Satan" and the people invaded, believing they were defending themselves from an imminent threat.

3b. The Popes pointed a finger, said the word, "Heretic" (or "Witch") and the people invaded, believing they were defending themselves from an imminent threat.

3c. Hitler pointed a finger, said the words, "Communist/Terrorist" and the people invaded, believing they were defending themselves from an imminent threat.

3d. Nixon pointed a finger, said the word, "Communist" and the people invaded, believing they were defending themselves from an imminent threat.

3e. Bush pointed a finger, said the word, "Terrorist" and the people invaded, believing they were defending themselves from an imminent threat.

The only imminent threat is the guy pointing the finger. Why is it Americans are allowed to carry guns, again?

Oh yeah, and finally, for those who cannot fathom why burning a book can mean so much. The book is a symbol. It is a symbol of what is considered the absolute holiest and most important of life (to those who follow it, obviously). Imagine if someone burned whatever means that to you. Whether it's your children, your constitution, your flag, or simply all your money - or whatever else you cherish most. Furthermore, there is the social aspect of belonging to a group which is under attack. I know there are a lot of people who think - and like to express such thoughts - that americans are stupid. I also expect there's a lot of americans here; so tell me; doesn't that kind of talk actually serve to unite you against arrogant europeans? Wouldn't you expect, then, that a people who felt their entire culture (since their culture stems from Islam) is under attack, that they would unite and defend? This is not to be misunderstood for some kind of justification for any kind of atrocities, but rather seeks to understand why so many people are apparently appaled by these burnings.

[Gauthier]

I am actually very spiritual, I just don't like Islam. And just because I dislike it, that doesn't render my opinion or feelings or views on the matter suddenly irrelevant. Or rather, if it does I'll remember thats how it works around here next time you have an opinion on something.

I know exactly why they think it was justified. Just like us treating these violent mobs like the enemies they are and annihilating them would be justified. But I know you wont support that, because apperantly burning Holy Books does merit violence, but violence does not merit violence. Except I also know if some radical batshit Christians killed someone over burning a Bible, you wouldn't be urging tolerance and understanding with them. Truly your orientalism knows no bounds.

I just love how mentioning a point on not trying to piss off a populace the United States government wants to "win the hearts and minds of" is equivalent to Orientalism.

[Gauthier]

And here's a little context. Those pissed-off Afghans are not university-educated middle class yuppies. Most of them are most likely below average to poor with not much in terms of education and who get their spirituality from a preacher who may or may not be of a mind to spin Islam for political gains. So it's more likely they'll take religious offense more readily. And these are the people the U.S. government need to keep calm or even make happy if they want to make significant efforts in clamping down on the Taliban.

[Gravlen]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/world/asia/koran-burning-in-afghanistan-prompts-second-day-of-protests.html

“This is not just about dishonoring the Koran, it is about disrespecting our dead and killing our children,” said Maruf Hotak, 60, a man who joined the crowd on the outskirts of Kabul, referring to an episode in Helmand Province when American Marines urinated on the dead bodies of men they described as insurgents and to a recent erroneous airstrike on civilians in Kapisa Province that killed eight young Afghans.

“They always admit their mistakes,” he said. “They burn our Koran and then they apologize. You can’t just disrespect our holy book and kill our innocent children and make a small apology.”

What?!?! Are you trying to suggest that there's more things going on than the mere burning of a (holy) book? That there's other factors coming into play and fuelling the anger? That we should look at the history of Afghanistan (for the last couple of years at least) and the current political and social problems as well? That we can't just write this off as "muslims overreacting to a singular event"?

If so... You are correct -_-

[The Corparation]

People in Afghanistan are still rioting and being killed because U.S. military forces burn some copies of the Koran that the were believed had been notated to pass secret messages between Islamic prisoners.

Meanwhile, in Pakistan, Osama bin Laden's old house is being demolished. I'm surprised it didn't become a shrine to a fallen matyr. But, in retrospect, and I've heard, that the typical middle-eastern mind set respects strength, so they'll happily get rid of anything that reminds them of their failure to protect their once leader.

Rather than continuously apologizing to the Islamic world and looking weak, President Obama should say that he was destroying those books because they'd been desecrated by terrorists. Maybe we ought to have sent them to a type of courts martial panel by U.S. Military Islamic Chaplains for writing in their Korans?

What do you think?

Actually, for once I agree with you there in the bolded. Saying something like that would of gone a long way towards easing tensions, wouldn't of eliminated them but would probably not be as bad.

[EnragedMaldivians]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/world/asia/koran-burning-in-afghanistan-prompts-second-day-of-protests.html

“This is not just about dishonoring the Koran, it is about disrespecting our dead and killing our children,” said Maruf Hotak, 60, a man who joined the crowd on the outskirts of Kabul, referring to an episode in Helmand Province when American Marines urinated on the dead bodies of men they described as insurgents and to a recent erroneous airstrike on civilians in Kapisa Province that killed eight young Afghans.

“They always admit their mistakes,” he said. “They burn our Koran and then they apologize. You can’t just disrespect our holy book and kill our innocent children and make a small apology.”

What?!?! Are you trying to suggest that there's more things going on than the mere burning of a (holy) book? That there's other factors coming into play and fuelling the anger? That we should look at the history of Afghanistan (for the last couple of years at least) and the current political and social problems as well? That we can't just write this off as "muslims overreacting to a singular event"?

If so... You are correct -_-

Heh, he is, in all honesty.

I'll take back my description of all those protestors as douchebags, the violent ones certainly are as far as I'm concerned - but yes, it's not unreasonable for many of them to have grievances linked to certain "mistakes", that they're tired of hearing apologies for.

[Desperate Measures]

Why would we burn the ones with secret messages in them?

[Gauthier]

Why would we burn the ones with secret messages in them?

Secret messages and subversive extremist gospel.

[Desperate Measures]

Why would we burn the ones with secret messages in them?

Secret messages and subversive extremist gospel.

Sounds like a keeper.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

Though the whole OP provided incredible lulz, this stood out.

Rather than continuously apologizing to the Islamic world and looking weak, President Obama should say that he was destroying those books because they'd been desecrated by terrorists.

Sure, but only if I'm allowed to take a bunch of Bibles, place them together, pour oil over them and then chuck a Molotov Cocktail at them for Christian crimes against my country.

[Nudist Islands]

I think everyone should be allowed to burn both the Bible and the Koran as long as it is their own copy. If I choose to burn my own books, that is only my own business... Anyway, it is insane to make so much noise just over some superstitious book.