cyrusabdollahi said:
We are discussing the issues of what the british soldiers did in this video, as the title of the thread explicitly states.
I am sorry, but you have gotten the topic wrong. Somebody posted mud propaganda, and didnt explain why. The #2 poster set the tone for this thread by pointing out the meta-message inherent in the video.
So how exactly does that excuse his actions?
Now this is the better of your questions. However, there is nothing ingenious about demanding perfect justice under warlike conditions. You have to look at this action in the larger context. Once that violent stone throwing gun wielding protester, which by any standard would be summarily sentenced to a year behind bars, leaves the gates of the compound, he is scott-free and there will be no charges. We both know that there is not much of a rule of law in Basra, and there is even less of a process of justice. The police force is essentially in the hands of Sadr and Fadhila. They have been beating up seculars, assassinating reporters, intimidating dissenters, and silencing oponents. They have been encouraging these stonethrowers and gun runners to attack the British troops.
Under these conditions, to complain about lack of perfect justice, is akin to complaining that your scotch does not have enough ice on a sinking Titanic. Yes, I suppose the staff on the Titanic continue to be responsible to deliver adequate ice under all conditions. But anyone observing the complainant will have to question their sincerety.
The British troop was acting in a manner that was in accordance with prevailing practice or common law in Basra. If the Islamists want to complain about that, then maybe they should first hold up the rule of law themselves, act in a civil manner, and stop assassinating journalists and beating up seculars. So yes in a bizarre and remote context, where for example if the British troops were faced with a non-violent protest under civil conditions, then I could see your complaint to be somewhat valid. But under the prevailing cultural and legal conditions of Basra, to demand perfect justice, where the British are totally understaffed and outnumbered, is rather disingenious.
What did I tell you about posting slander. You are going to get a warning for that my friend. I have no more patience to put up with people accusing me for words that THEY put in MY mouth.
You keep putting words in my mouth like that and you won't be here much longer.
Note: I do not need friends like you. Your attempt to bully me and silence me into submission is hilarious. You sound like those Mohammedans who jump up and down everytime somebody brings up a fact about Prophet Mohammad, such as him holding slaves. Dont worry, you can't intimidate me and I suggest that you act civilly around here and allow people to voice their opinion. I have the right to voice my opinion about your message and method. That is exactly what I am doing when questioning an insincere post. If you find that to be slander, then boy, you aint know nothin 'bout the law or about civil discourse.
In fact, I should be the one putting in a complaint about you on your attempts to silence people from voicing their opinion about insincerety on this forum. Now you go jump up and down, and try to excuse the so-called "infalliable" Prophet and his stable of slaves, and try to silence me my dear sir.
If I issue a warning and you nicely convince me you had no bad intentions, or that I misunderstood, I am likely to remove it. If the behavior is repeated, the warning can be re-applied and doubled. The purpose of warnings is to let members know what is and is not acceptable. It is not for the purpose of banning a member. The only members that get permanently banned are the ones that repeatedly refuse to adhere to the guidelines.
It certainly is not civilized behavior!
<blows kiss at Evo 
