Sure we all get what you mean milfhunter but it's still fucking stupid. To do it just for a high school class is taking an unnecessary risk, i'm sure all of us can agree on that. Taking unnecassary risks isn't couragous it's stupid, if Hassan possessed some kind of judgement he would know that going to Iraq for a high school class is indeed stupid. The same goes for you milfhunter.
Hey Kraco, what the fuck is your point? You have the most pointless post in this whole thread. Congratulations. If military doctrine doesn't condone the unnecessary risk of life, then why is it still there after no weapons of mass destruction have been found, no connection between Saddam Hussein and Usama bin Laden has been established, and the soldiers don't even have armor? Where's the training to protect yourself from suicide bombers and rioters? I didn't know that my 18 year old friend, who naively and idealistically joined the Marines, has been trained as a chemical expert and an electronics engineer to disassemble improvised explosive devices. Oh wait, he hasn't. So, shut the fuck up.Congratulations on having the second most pointless post in this thread. If you read the CNN article, you'll learn that his class assignment was only to pick an international topic and write editorials about it -- basically what your overpaid news reporter at CNN does. Hassan took it upon himself, out of his own volition -- not because it was a class assignment -- to immerse himself in the environment he is writing about. Stop trying to use Kraco's "unnecessary risk" argument because it is doublespeak, just like "necessary risk".Originally posted by: PSJ
Sure we all get what you mean milfhunter but it's still fucking stupid.If he had gotten killed, how is it any different from the thousands of injured and dead soldiers? They're citizens too. Doesn't the media already utilize their deaths to push the right-wing agenda, too? Besides, what terrorist isn't inhumane? A lot of doublespeak going on today.Originally posted by: DB_Hunter
think of what would have happened if he got killed... the very same media would start utilising his death as an attack on the 'common American'
If he had gotten killed, how is it any different from the thousands of injured and dead soldiers? They're citizens too. Doesn't the media already utilize their deaths to push the right-wing agenda, too? Besides, what terrorist isn't inhumane? A lot of doublespeak going on today.[/quote]Originally posted by: milfhunter
Q]Originally posted by: DB_Hunter
think of what would have happened if he got killed... the very same media would start utilising his death as an attack on the 'common American'
There is always a certain understanding that soldiers in a war zone would be killed... not high school civillians. That's the emotion that would have been played on. As for the discussion on terrorists being inhumane, take a look at the Iraq War thread and join the debate in there... i'm pretty sure that the point of 'someone's terrorist being another man's freedom fighter' is covered in there.
Wow, go ahead and degrade the sacrifice of every soldier's life then.Originally posted by: DB_Hunter
There is always a certain understanding that soldiers in a war zone would be killed...
"Oh, 1,000+ American freedom fighters have died? So what? It was, well, in a certain understanding, to be expected. Sucks to be them. Let's just go out and recruit some more."
I guess recruitment is just like reloading ammo, but in this case, ammo is human lives.
"But wait, a high school civilian has died? Oh, hell to the fuck no! That does it. That's crossing the line! That's fucking stupid!"What the fuck is your point? Thanks, you have just given EpyonNext the pleasure of a hard on because he can now reference Einstein's theory of relativity, too. Good job.Originally posted by: DB_Hunter
'someone's terrorist being another man's freedom fighter'
Don't be patronising and assume that everyone thinks that American soldiers are freedom fighters being sacrificed for a just cause.Originally posted by: milfhunter
Wow, go ahead and degrade the sacrifice of every soldier's life then.Originally posted by: DB_Hunter
There is always a certain understanding that soldiers in a war zone would be killed...
"Oh, 1,000+ American freedom fighters have died? So what? It was, well, in a certain understanding, to be expected. Sucks to be them. Let's just go out and recruit some more."
That's the way emotions are for some people."But wait, a high school civilian has died? Oh, hell to the fuck no! That does it. That's crossing the line! That's fucking stupid!
My point there is not everyone is on one side."What the fuck is your point? Thanks, you have just given EpyonNext the pleasure of a hard on because he can now reference Einstein's theory of relativity, too. Good job.Originally posted by: DB_Hunter
'someone's terrorist being another man's freedom fighter'
Its so funny how milfhunter is telling other people that theyre making the most useless posts when hes making posts on just bashing them. Go ahead, bash me for this post..........retard.....
***Contribution to the thread***
Theres a difference when a soldier dies and a civilian dies. A soilder is fighting, so he can expect to be injured or lose his life. But that doesnt make his cause less honorable. But when a civilian dies, the civilian is usually innocent ( Though in this case, it would be Hassan's fault if he died). The definition of a civilian is a non combatant, someone who doesnt fight, someone who shouldnt die. So yes, there is a difference between when a soilder dies and a civilian dies. The soldier chooses willingly to fight knowing the consequences. A civilian however does not wish to fight and does not want to risk imjury or death.
I love reading about "honorable" deaths in the army when the news commonly puts new photos on the air of people who didn't even make it to 20.
It's such a fucking waste.
"They call it 'The American Dream' because you have to be asleep to believe it" - George Carlin
Ok, then. You can suck my dick, faggot.Originally posted by: God#2
bash me for this post..........retard.....
Contribution to thread:The whole point of immersive journalism is that the immersion is part of the research, and I'm pretty sure that he would've learned the basics of the language due to the situations he encountered such as conversing with Muslim men over politics. They probably taught him a disproportionate amount of profanity, and I'm pretty sure he can perfectly say "kill the Jews" now.Originally posted by: Assassin
the best part about this article is that this kid is all into immersion journalism, but doesn't think to do some research and try to blend it, or learn some basics of the language. What a shitty journalist he would make.You'll be the first one I send to get beheaded. Where's the generalization now?Originally posted by: Assassin
HOLY BIASED GENERALIZATIONS BATMAN!!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote