SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic

Joined: Aug 24 2005 Location: Mount Holly, NJ Posts: 1062

Tishwitch wrote:

edit: Wasn't he overheard saying something racist in a restaurant somewhere? I believe there was some news coverage on that.

Do you mean at the G8 Summit?

That wasn't racist. It was true.

Posted: Jan 04 2007 11:13 pm

I honestly can't remember when it was... or what exactly happened... some other forum member [unnamed] reminded me of the event, so I posted it hoping to get more details.

edit: No, that isn't the moment I was referring to. Though, the talk about Hezbollah is a whole other issue I refuse to even get into! I have far too much to say, and I don't feel like talking war anymore today.

Posted: Jan 05 2007 02:29 am

Tish, 'fess up: You're really Kanye West, aren't you?

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

Tishwitch wrote:

S. McCracken wrote:

Well, the rules of engagement clearly make the type of killing that Bush (and other countries, may I remind you) is doing totally legal.

ROE in the US: The 1999 Marine Corps Close Combat Manual (MCRP 3-02B) presents a “Continuum of Force” the following breakdown:

* Level 1: Compliant (Cooperative). The subject responds and complies to verbal commands. Close combat techniques do not apply.
* Level 2: Resistant (Passive). The subject resists verbal commands but complies immediately to any contact controls. Close combat techniques do not apply.
* Level 3: Resistant (Active). The subject initially demonstrates physical resistance. Use compliance techniques to control the situation. Level three incorporates close combat techniques to physically force a subject to comply. Techniques include: Come-along holds, Soft-handed stunning blows, Pain compliance through the use of joint manipulation and the use of pressure points.
* Level 4: Assaultive (Bodily Harm). The subject may physically attack, but does not use a weapon. Use defensive tactics to neutralize the threat. Defensive tactics include: Blocks, Strikes, Kicks, Enhanced pain compliance procedures, Impact weapon blocks and blows.
* Level 5: Assaultive (Lethal Force). The subject usually has a weapon and will either kill or injure someone if he is not stopped immediately and brought under control. The subject must be controlled by the use of deadly force with or without a firearm or weapon.

This last one is where Saddam Hussein, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. fit in. But, as far as the innocent people, they don't. The innocent men, women, and children (and their pets too since they probably own cats, hamsters, budgies) do not have weapons, did not resist anything, and were killed none the less. Saddam himself did not engage in any armed assaults against the U.S. (recently anyway) and was I believe hiding in a hole when they found him. So, don't apply ROE here, apply them where they rightfully should. ROE in the US applies to enemies that are resisting SOMETHING... Saddam was convicted of killings from over 10 years ago. These rules are not applicable.

um, this is the united states marine corps close combat manual. I don't think this applies where you're trying to use it. I'm more annoyed by the fact that you feel justified to call me retarded than the actual deed itself. hypocrisy!

Posted: Jan 05 2007 02:45 am

Spanky: If you think it's hot that the "forum chick" is an egotistical male rapper, than OK, I am Kanye! (on I side note, I was watching the benefit concert as it happened live! Ask Valdronius... I called him screaming about the craziest moment in tv history)

As for JEW: I refuse to comment on this B.S. anymore. I won't be the one to blame for another post being locked.

But, I will quote myself, since obviously you didn't see this earlier

"I won't try to pretend I know what I'm talking about, I'll just look like a douchebag, and there's enough of that already floating around."

So, I've already admitted that I know jack shit about the military. I have zero interest in the armed forces, so can we leave it at that?

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

yeah, after this.

if you don't know anyhtign about it, why would you quote it and try to use it in your argument?

Posted: Jan 05 2007 03:17 am

Da Rules wrote:

5. The SydLexia.com forums are not a pulpit.
As it turns out, SydLexia.com is a pop culture website, not a religious website. The forum staff openly encourages you to discuss topical issues involving religion, but we remind you that religion is an extremely sensitive issue...

I think we can assume that this goes for politics as well.

Posted: Jan 05 2007 06:05 am

Actually, no. People can discuss politics all they want. And the Saddam hanging was a topical issue anyway. Rule #5 was aimed at people like Juffo-Wup with his "OMG, YOU BELIEVE THAT THERE'S EVEN A SLIGHT POSSIBLITY THAT THERE COULD BE A HIGHER BEING!? YOU SUCK." mentality and his relentless desire to push it on everyone else for no apparent reason.

Posted: Jan 05 2007 09:31 am

Juffo was an atheist (somebody spell that right)?

Posted: Jan 05 2007 12:32 pm

Alright, my bad. Politics and religion normally have the same effect on people. My mistake.

Posted: Jan 05 2007 06:51 pm

Char Aznable wrote:

Juffo was an atheist (somebody spell that right)?

You did in fact spell that correctly. Atheists even disobey the "I before E" rule. The temerity! Smile

Posted: Jan 06 2007 12:11 am

Wow, lucky.

And you shouldn't push your religious or political beliefs on others.

Posted: Jan 06 2007 06:37 pm

I dunno if this is on topic.. but