US military: soldier shot at Quran for practice

[calpoon]

Iraq is not a threat to the world. It had tanks and missles and bioweapons and it wasn't a threat. You really think that a few guys with 1980's AK-47's and RPG's are going to be a threat now?

terrrorism is one of the safest things in the world. Mcdonalds is more deadly than terrorism (far more people die from heart attacks than car bombs.)

it's a fucking joke.

 

[DreamSparrow]

This is much the same as that Dutch kid who waved his cock at the Taj Mahal, or people who burn the flags of others. It's a stupid, disrespectful act that does nothing good for the world, and only stirs up animosity and hatred. People in the armed services should know better than anyone else that symbols do matter. As soon as anyone found out about this, of course it was going to get people riled up.

America's occupied by a foreign nation, and the occupiers start desecrating the Bible, the Constitution, and the Stars and Stripes. Americans wouldn't be pissed off and resentful at the sight of that? Sureee they wouldn't(!)

Calpoon makes an excellent point. Radical Islamist terrorism is a relatively small threat compared to the threats in the past. These people are poorly equipped, relatively small in number, and prior to Iraq, the number of casualties they caused was also fairly low. The Western world's gone mad, making a monster out of something which is (or was) pretty small to begin with.

I've never heard of em either. Of course I don't give a shit so maybe thats why. We don't need the Iraqi support, we need to get our troops out of there and blow the whole place to hell. Those people over there don't give a fuck about our soldiers or americans anymore than I don't give a fuck about them! It only stands to reason that a few hundred or a few thousand well laid carpet bombing campaigns are the way to go! I would say nukes, but that just wouldn't be good for the rest of us.

I think posts like this should be highlighted for posterity. This person is advocating mass murder.

Muslims will always find contrived motivations to be upset about us infidel pigs. They don't need a GI's practical joke to give them an opportunity to rant against humanity, secularism and reason.

I think the occupation of two of their nations in the last decade, as well as the continuing support of the state whose flag you have in your signature is far from contrived. There is a reason why Scandinavian countries don't really have a substantial problem with terrorism despite being Western and advanced -- they stay the hell out of other nations.

 

[Facial_King]

I sort of doubt that a U.S. soldier would get off scot-free for shooting up a Bible, either in Iraq or at a U.S. base. The U.S. is occupying a country where the vast majority of people - most of them Muslims of one stripe or another - want us to leave. The idea is that we're supposed to be helping them establish a stable democracy and be sensitive to their religious and cultural realities. Frankly, I think that's a lost cause when you invade a country and the primary mode of "caring" is bullets and bombs. People understandably fail to see a more nuanced message there. We're occupying THEIR country with our military. They want us to go. Separation of church and state is not their thing so much. I think it should be, but I don't think we can force that value on them militarily, and we're not succeeding in getting them to adopt that value (we're not respecting our OWN separation of church and state enough these days, so that's no surprise). So their religion and their politics basically merge together. Having a guy on our side shooting up a copy of the text recognized as holy by most of the citizenry seems rather unhelpful and unconstructive, regardless if one is for or against the war.

Also, let's not forget that it's NOT the United States Christian Army. It's the United States Army. There are plenty of Muslim Americans and plenty of Muslims serving in the U.S. Army (and the other branches).

I have mixed feelings about it, but as far as I know, signing up with the military does seem to involve a voluntary curtailment of some of your rights to free speech. Soldiers aren't as free to criticize the Prez as the rest of us, no? And I'm guessing they can't hope to get away with burning a flag, either. That one seems reasonable, all things considered. Shooting religious texts also strikes me as behavior that soldiers ought not be engaging in.

If I were in charge of a platoon (I know, hardy-har-har), I wouldn't allow any of my troops to waste bullets on such frivolous exercises of hate - or an incredibly juvenile and pointless stunt. Just shoot at a normal target, the enemy that's shooting at us, or just skip firing a gun. Taxpayers pay for those ridiculously overpriced bullets, remember.

 

[calpoon]

at the end of the day, sure the Koran is bullshit, but when you go out of your way to antagonize people for their beliefs, you are just being an asshole.

Sure I'll rip on religion on these boards when we are having a discussion about it, but I don't make a thread just to announce that idea, and I really don't go to people's churches and tell them to their face that they I think they are full of shit. what would be the point? that would be rude and disrespectful.

Maybe most of us here don't really care about such things, but Dream Sparrow is right. If the situations were reversed, if it was a foreigner in America desecrating the bible, you know that tons of people would be pissed off.

 

[BlueBalls]

When Iraq is on the brink of a religious civil war, I dont think it is such a good idea to use their holy book as target practice.

This is basically a slap in the face to all those people the military is suposidly trying to liberate.

 

[Facial_King]

at the end of the day, sure the Koran is bullshit, but when you go out of your way to antagonize people for their beliefs, you are just being an asshole.

Sure I'll rip on religion on these boards when we are having a discussion about it, but I don't make a thread just to announce that idea, and I really don't go to people's churches and tell them to their face that they I think they are full of shit. what would be the point? that would be rude and disrespectful.

Maybe most of us here don't really care about such things, but Dream Sparrow is right. If the situations were reversed, if it was a foreigner in America desecrating the bible, you know that tons of people would be pissed off.

Very well put, calpoon. I'd rep you if I could.

 

[Nomad 800]

I personally think it should mean nothing. It is just a book. But it hurts America's cause and is bound to inflame Iraqi's; which ends up putting American soldiers in Iraq in just that much more danger.
So overall, it was foolish.

Also, that book means as much to Muslim's as the U.S. flag means to some American's. Would the latter that think it is just a book be okay with Iraqi's using The Stars And Stripes for target practise? It's just cloth after all.
Just a thought.

 

[calpoon]

this goes back to the Military dissenter thread on here.

The reality of the situation is that a soldiers actions are not his alone, but because of the nature of his occupation, they are a reflection upon his commanding officers and nearly on the military as a whole. Like it or not. that's something to keep in mind.

 

[Friday on my mind]

at the end of the day, sure the Koran is bullshit, but when you go out of your way to antagonize people for their beliefs, you are just being an asshole.

Sure I'll rip on religion on these boards when we are having a discussion about it, but I don't make a thread just to announce that idea, and I really don't go to people's churches and tell them to their face that they I think they are full of shit. what would be the point? that would be rude and disrespectful.

Maybe most of us here don't really care about such things, but Dream Sparrow is right. If the situations were reversed, if it was a foreigner in America desecrating the bible, you know that tons of people would be pissed off.

I agree with this.I'm an atheist that thinks all of the religions are as you say BS.But as you say thats not that point.The point is we are trying to get people who do hold these things in high regard to support us.And as others (dreamsparrow,Blueballs etc,) have also said this is not helpfull obviously.Nobody anywhere likes their belief systems and or treasured symbols demeaned.

this goes back to the Military dissenter thread on here.

The reality of the situation is that a soldiers actions are not his alone, but because of the nature of his occupation, they are a reflection upon his commanding officers and nearly on the military as a whole. Like it or not. that's something to keep in mind.

You are correct, soldiers are not just representing the american military but are representatives of america itself.And to facial king I would say you are correct you give up some rights when you join the military.But the truth is you don't have unlimited right of free speech even in the private world.You can't work somewhere and insult your customers religion and think your going to keep your job.Like soldiers you are a representative of something other than just yourself and must act accordingly.
Best thing would be for us to get out of there A.S.A.P.
This is following the pattern of Vietnam where our soldiers became less sympathetic to the natives as many thought the people they were fighting for in theory (the people of the south) were not really supporting us and our soldiers started to resent them and see them as all the enemy or at least as not supporting our goals enough.The longer we stay the more the resentments on both sides will most likely grow.The one idea I am always amazed by is the people that think in the end Iraq may be an ally of america when we do finally withdraw.Maybe they won't despise us and seek retribution, but think warmly of us would be a miracle IMO.

 

[Peter Gazinya]

When Iraq is on the brink of a religious civil war, I dont think it is such a good idea to use their holy book as target practice.

This is basically a slap in the face to all those people the military is suposidly trying to liberate.

That's what I'm thinking. This Quran is a symbol of the Muslim religion. The Muslim religion is a symbol of Terrorism. As a general rule it is ok to piss on, wipe ass, shoot up, anything that symboizes terrorism.

In an isolated vacuum, taking into account NO other factors involved in the situation, a US soldier can blast up the Quran all day long for all I care.

The problem is our military involvement in SOMEONE ELSE'S country in supposedly under the guise of "liberating" it's people. Well, a majority of these people subscribe to the Muslim religion. In the vain that this "war" is being fought, these people are NOT the enemy. Whether it's ridiculous or not, the Quran is an artifact that they hold in a sacred light, and therefore we, their "guests" and allies should not be shooting up something that means so much to them.

If the Iraqi army invaded the US to save us from George W. Bush, would you appreciate them shooting at the American flag or, even worse, a Dale Earnhardt T-Shirt? I know I wouldn't.

 

[Facetious]

Maybe it was the handiest thing available to conduct an external ballistics test !

After all, I don't think that the yellow pages are available in 'raq.

 

[Facetious]

I agree with this.I'm an atheist that thinks all of the religions are as you say BS

Aside Enlightenment
What is an agnostic, a passive atheist ?

 

[calpoon]

If the Iraqi army invaded the US to save us from George W. Bush, would you appreciate them shooting at the American flag or, even worse, a Dale Earnhardt T-Shirt? I know I wouldn't.

Dubya AND Dale Earnhardt merchandise, you say?

Welcome liberators! :bowdown:

 

[tubuler]

"Priests...dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight and scowl on the fatal harbinger announcing the subversions of the duperies on which they live".
-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Correa de Serra, April 11, 1820


"A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side".
- Aristotle, Politics.

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful".
- Seneca the Younger


Nearly every intellectual throughout history has been an atheist. Why? Because religion is only believable to the indoctrinated, the brainwashed, and the weak-minded.
- tubuler on freeones

 

[tubuler]

When Iraq is on the brink of a religious civil war, I dont think it is such a good idea to use their holy book as target practice.

This is basically a slap in the face to all those people the military is suposidly trying to liberate.

Think about this,

If religion didn't exist then 9/11 wouldn't have happened because no one would have thought that flying planes into buildings would've gotten them a one-way ticket to paradise where they could bang 72 virgins all day. (poor virgins by the way)

Because 9/11 never happened, our government wouldn't have been able to rush us into an illegal war. Therefore, no American troops are using the koran for target practice.

Plus the koran wouldn't exist anyway because religion doesn't exist.

Problem solved.

 

[Jason z]

that is like an muslim coming over here to America using a bible as target practice.. i wonder what we would do if that happened?

 

[tubuler]

that is like an muslim coming over here to america using a bible as target practice.. i wonder what we would do if that happened?

I wouldn't do anything. Because the Bible is the same thing as the koran. A work of fiction. In fact. The ideas written in both of those so called "holy books" are largely dangerous and destructive. Better to shoot at them then to believe what is written in them.

 

[ballzano]

nuking iraq?........
fascism?............
hitler ...who saddam idolized?
your worried?

 

[meesterperfect]

Be tolerant of others. Don't be judgemental of others.
AKA- Neuter yourself.

 

[Facetious]

There is a reason why Scandinavian countries don't really have a substantial problem with terrorism despite being Western and advanced -- they stay the hell out of other nations.

What about the terrorism that takes place in India, is that America’s fault ? Bali, Philippines and Morocco too ?

Calpoon makes an excellent point. Radical Islamist terrorism is a relatively small threat compared to the threats in the past.

Purely speculation and confusion. If it’s America’s fault, as suggested above, wouldn’t it be safe to assume that there will be harsh reprisals for such deeds as the occupation of other nations ? “High Alert” :eek: (Tom Ridge Red Crayon !)