MAGAThread XVII: All Things NOT Impeachment

[Gormwood]

Once again, I said nothing about calling for Gallagher to be killed and was talking about how U.S. personnel should be better than an ISIS fighter and set moral examples for others. It's really pathetic that you cannot defend your approval of Gallagher treating a dead fighter like a 30-point buck so instead you build a straw man big enough to light up at the Burning Man Festival and fantasize that I specifically called for him to be killed or agree with Liriena, all the while repeating a post that dud no such thing.

You can deny it however you like, your own post says otherwise. Also, I never denied that I was okay with Gallager treating a piece of shit like a piece of shit.

Someone warn the Egyptians, De Nial has flloded the banks again. Comically rich you endorse a war crime again foreignets but get triggered by someone else saying a war criminal should be killed for it.

[The East Marches II]

One wonders if the prosecutor was hilariously incompetent and did a good enough for government work job or he actively sabotaged his own case tbh.

[Telconi]

Your evidence?

Feels are more important than evidence.

Implying that something being "fucked up" isn't a category entirely based upon "feels"

[Fahran]

One wonders if the prosecutor was hilariously incompetent and did a good enough for government work job or he actively sabotaged his own case tbh.

I don't know enough about how court martials work to really even guess on that one. Presumably, there's some incentive not to sabotage cases.

[Chernoslavia]

You can deny it however you like, your own post says otherwise. Also, I never denied that I was okay with Gallager treating a piece of shit like a piece of shit.

Someone warn the Egyptians, De Nial has flloded the banks again. Comically rich you endorse a war crime again foreignets but get triggered by someone else saying a war criminal should be killed for it.

And comically rich how you simply decide to call him a foreigner while calling Gallagher a war criminal. Can you be anymore apologetic about terrorists? Lol. ISIS lives still don’t matter Gauth. Also, maybe proof check your fucking writing next time?

[Ifreann]

Ah, so you believe that some SEALs are randomly out to get another SEAL for no reason. Very plausible.

Or he could've just been their scapegoat.

For what?

Tell you what, until you actually got proof he did kill the prisoner then we can talk, until then I got better things to waste my time on.

I have an alternative suggestion. You give me a reason to doubt the stories about the shit that Gallagher did and I'll give it all due consideration. Until then I'm going to carry on believing the most likely explanation, that he is exactly the violent and dangerous person he appears to be and people like you are only claiming that he's anything else because he's on Trump's side.

---

One wonders if the prosecutor was hilariously incompetent and did a good enough for government work job or he actively sabotaged his own case tbh.

I don't know enough about how court martials work to really even guess on that one. Presumably, there's some incentive not to sabotage cases.

The plural is courts martial. It's one of those weird terms where the adjective comes second, like attorneys general, or videos game.

[Vassenor]

Once again, I said nothing about calling for Gallagher to be killed and was talking about how U.S. personnel should be better than an ISIS fighter and set moral examples for others. It's really pathetic that you cannot defend your approval of Gallagher treating a dead fighter like a 30-point buck so instead you build a straw man big enough to light up at the Burning Man Festival and fantasize that I specifically called for him to be killed or agree with Liriena, all the while repeating a post that dud no such thing.

You can deny it however you like, your own post says otherwise. Also, I never denied that I was okay with Gallager treating a piece of shit like a piece of shit.

So are we to take it that you wholly endorse what ISIS do to their prisoners then? After all from their point of view that's treating a piece of shit like a piece of shit.

[Fahran]

The plural is courts martial. It's one of those weird terms where the adjective comes second, like attorneys general, or videos game.

I really should have known that already. Thanks for the correction, Iffy.

[Gormwood]

Someone warn the Egyptians, De Nial has flloded the banks again. Comically rich you endorse a war crime again foreignets but get triggered by someone else saying a war criminal should be killed for it.

And comically rich how you simply decide to call him a foreigner while calling Gallagher a war criminal. Can you be anymore apologetic about terrorists? Lol. ISIS lives still don’t matter Gauth. Also, maybe proof check your fucking writing next time?

Oh, was the dead fighter American? For someone who supposedly opposes ISIS you sound an awful lot like a member.

[Chernoslavia]

Or he could've just been their scapegoat.

For what?

Tell you what, until you actually got proof he did kill the prisoner then we can talk, until then I got better things to waste my time on.

I have an alternative suggestion. You give me a reason to doubt the stories about the shit that Gallagher did and I'll give it all due consideration. Until then I'm going to carry on believing the most likely explanation, that he is exactly the violent and dangerous person he appears to be and people like you are only claiming that he's anything else because he's on Trump's side.

---

I don't know enough about how court martials work to really even guess on that one. Presumably, there's some incentive not to sabotage cases.

The plural is courts martial. It's one of those weird terms where the adjective comes second, like attorneys general, or videos game.

Nope. I’m not doing your fucking work for you, either provide evidence he did murder an ISIS prisoner or you’re full of shit.

[Chernoslavia]

And comically rich how you simply decide to call him a foreigner while calling Gallagher a war criminal. Can you be anymore apologetic about terrorists? Lol. ISIS lives still don’t matter Gauth. Also, maybe proof check your fucking writing next time?

Oh, was the dead fighter American? For someone who supposedly opposes ISIS you sound an awful lot like a member.

Amazing that you think taking a photo of a dead corpse is all it takes to make one a terrorist. So what does that make someone who thinks one should be killed for it?

[Fahran]

Oh, was the dead fighter American? For someone who supposedly opposes ISIS you sound an awful lot like a member.

Amazing that you think taking a photo of a dead corpse is all it takes to make one a terrorist. So what does that make someone who thinks one should be killed for it?

It does make one a war criminal arguably.

[Chernoslavia]

You can deny it however you like, your own post says otherwise. Also, I never denied that I was okay with Gallager treating a piece of shit like a piece of shit.

So are we to take it that you wholly endorse what ISIS do to their prisoners then? After all from their point of view that's treating a piece of shit like a piece of shit.

Not surprised that you’d think that ISIS fighters and American troops are the same. Hint: They’re not.

[Chernoslavia]

Amazing that you think taking a photo of a dead corpse is all it takes to make one a terrorist. So what does that make someone who thinks one should be killed for it?

It does make one a war criminal arguably.

But it doesn’t make one a terrorist or the same level as ISIS when all that someone done was take a photo.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

So are we to take it that you wholly endorse what ISIS do to their prisoners then? After all from their point of view that's treating a piece of shit like a piece of shit.

Not surprised that you’d think that ISIS fighters and American troops are the same. Hint: They’re not.

Not inherently, but they are also not inherently different. An ISIS fighter has the possibility of being more moral than a US soldier. An ISIS fighter who fights to defend his home town from imminent destruction is morally better than a US soldier who deploys poison gas against that town. A US soldier is not by definition better than an IS fighter, though, ceteris paribus, the US soldier can be assumed to fight for a better cause. Still, there is room there, even though the IS fighter is presumed to be fighting for an abhorrent ideology.

EDIT: Also, your adversary should never be a reason to lower the expectation you have for yourself. Just because your enemy does something wrong does not mean you have to do something that you consider wrong.

[Fahran]

But it doesn’t make one a terrorist or the same level as ISIS when all that someone done was take a photo.

I agree with that. I do think we should strive to discourage war crimes though. One day, we want our men and women to come home and live peaceful lives, no? How much harder will that be if their hearts have become so calloused by war that atrocities have become second nature? We need to conserve morality and convention. We need to conserve humanity even to the inhumane and bestial.

[Telconi]

Not surprised that you’d think that ISIS fighters and American troops are the same. Hint: They’re not.

Not inherently, but they are also not inherently different. An ISIS fighter has the possibility of being more moral than a US soldier. An ISIS fighter who fights to defend his home town from imminent destruction is morally better than a US soldier who deploys poison gas against that town. A US soldier is not by definition better than an IS fighter, though, ceteris paribus, the US soldier can be assumed to fight for a better cause. Still, there is room there, even though the IS fighter is presumed to be fighting for an abhorrent ideology.

Not if we're using any respectable moral code.

[Vassenor]

So are we to take it that you wholly endorse what ISIS do to their prisoners then? After all from their point of view that's treating a piece of shit like a piece of shit.

Not surprised that you’d think that ISIS fighters and American troops are the same. Hint: They’re not.

Not surprised you're intentionally dodging the point to avoid having to admit Gallagher did a bad.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Not inherently, but they are also not inherently different. An ISIS fighter has the possibility of being more moral than a US soldier. An ISIS fighter who fights to defend his home town from imminent destruction is morally better than a US soldier who deploys poison gas against that town. A US soldier is not by definition better than an IS fighter, though, ceteris paribus, the US soldier can be assumed to fight for a better cause. Still, there is room there, even though the IS fighter is presumed to be fighting for an abhorrent ideology.

Not if we're using any respectable moral code.

And what is that code? Everything is permitted in name of the star-spangled banner?

[Telconi]

Not if we're using any respectable moral code.

And what is that code? Everything is permitted in name of the star-spangled banner?

Yes, I think it's moral to support an evil state apparatus which inflicts tyranny upon people.

[Fahran]

Not surprised you're intentionally dodging the point to avoid having to admit Gallagher did a bad.

You thought I was dodging earlier when, in actuality, we were having different conversations. I do think Gallagher did a bad. I think Trump did a good and then did a bad with Gallagher's case given the actual conviction and the fact that Gallagher was clearly being punished more severely on one conviction because the other charges didn't hold up in court. There should have been some penalty but the original one was excessive.

[Vassenor]

Not inherently, but they are also not inherently different. An ISIS fighter has the possibility of being more moral than a US soldier. An ISIS fighter who fights to defend his home town from imminent destruction is morally better than a US soldier who deploys poison gas against that town. A US soldier is not by definition better than an IS fighter, though, ceteris paribus, the US soldier can be assumed to fight for a better cause. Still, there is room there, even though the IS fighter is presumed to be fighting for an abhorrent ideology.

Not if we're using any respectable moral code.

And where does this magical objective morality come from?

[Fahran]

Not if we're using any respectable moral code.

And where does this magical objective morality come from?

G-d. <3

[Chernoslavia]

Not surprised that you’d think that ISIS fighters and American troops are the same. Hint: They’re not.

Not surprised you're intentionally dodging the point to avoid having to admit Gallagher did a bad.

Nah, just against my religion to answer stupid questions, and I already stated that I just don’t care that Gallagher did it.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

And was the bomb-n'-dash campaign euphemistically called Operation Unified Protector moral?