More Wikileaks.Follow

And you wonder why we have no faith in our military.

NO, I will not explain any of this to you, figure it out for your damn self for once.

So, where is the proof of abuse again...?



No, that's not what I'm "admitting." I'm trying to explain to you why I understand more about the Iraq war than the Korean war. It's because it happened during my lifetime.

And your emotional attachment to the military and your insane way of noodling things out are why we never agree.




A) We should get involved because we were supposed to be training the Iraqi army and we shouldn't allow those abuses to continue. According to the "goals" that have been established after the WMD **** turned out to be a pack of lies, we were supposed to be "liberating" these people from an abusive dictator.

B) I don't even know what mission you're talking about here, but I, personally, don't feel like abuse of detainees should be less of a priority.

C) Each and every one of those reports had been closed with no further follow up. I've seen nothing to tell me that anything further was done to address the situation. And I certainly don't see you offering anything other than excuses to assuage your own peace of mind.



Yes. Because interpreting "only those opposed to the war" as meaning "people opposed to the Iraq war" and not interpreting it as "those who want to tarnish the good name of the United States!" is pretty stupid...




I never said one meant more to me than the other. I've just never heard of any abuses from the Koreans. And, once again, you've done nothing to prove your point. If such abuses happen, then it's obviously a concern.

But you know what? This has fuck all to do with Korea! I'll give you props for leading me down one of your twisted side paths once again, Alma. But I won't continue following you down that rabbit hole. Try to stay on topic for once in your life.

I'm going off what the Korean Soldiers told us. I understand if you don't believe it, because it isn't "your war".
For you though, I'll try to find a non-blog stating as such. It's no different than the "Old Army" in the US where the drill sergeants use to beat up people. We can't do that anymore. I would even bet that every nation's military had a similar phase during their history.




I understand why you understand more about the Iraqi war. I wouldn't expect you to be a Korean War expert no more I would expect you to be a WWII expert. The point is, I told you what is happening because I knew that you didn't know. I told you this, because I knew that your emotional attachment to the detainees doesn't have anything to do with principle but your opinion of the war.

Since you strongly disagree with the war, you attach yourself with anything that is negative without hesitation. The proof of that is you dismissing my Korean Soldier abuse with you wanting more proof, yet you are assuming that nothing is being done or has been done to prevent the same abuse you are referring to on the detainees. Furthermore, if one of your friends or family members came back from Iraq and said "It's so bad over there, I've heard of so many stories of detainees being abused by the IA", you wouldn't have asked that person to prove it.

Emotional attachment to the military? Give me an example. You are confusing logic for emotion. I even stated in my last post that the US and the IA may or may not have done anything to prevent such abuse, but you just can't assume nothing was done because you're against the war. That is your emotional drive. If I had an emotional attachment to the military, I would say silly things like "The US would never do any war crimes".

On the contrary, I said war crimes exist. I'm just able to use logic and common sense to know that probably most of these war crimes that weren't handled were not documented. No one would purposely commit a war crime, send up a report telling on himself and later be filled in a central database for everyone to see. No one has yet given me a possible motive for that scenario to happen.

Bottom line is, you all were emotionally played through your over all ignorance and curiosity and you don't want to admit that this entire "Wiki-leak" is nothing more than a publicity stunt to stir up emotion with no substance.



A) We are training the Iraqi on tactical movements, not how to govern. How they handle their detainees is a political and social aspect handled by their people. Just because you think a guilty killer who's confessed to the murder with witnesses deserves a "fair trial" and a free lawyer doesn't mean other countries should have to abide by that same philosophy. That punishment for murder might be murder on the spot. I've heard a number Americans who have stated that they wish the American system were the same way. You steal, you lose a hand. You kill somebody, no death row, just death.

B) The missions that we have everyday in the war zone. The convoy logistic missions, the retrans site missions, the food delivery missions, all of these are priority over the possible abuse of CRIMINALS. The focus is on removing the insurgents and terrorists. How the IA handle their criminals is no where near on the same level of priority and only a fool would think otherwise.

C) Closed? Once again, these are not police reports. These are freakin SIGACTs on the CPOF. You're talking about SIGACTs from years ago. Are you saying that you are continually receiving classified documents to your email?

This is what I'm talking about, blatant ignorance with the audacity to argue as if you know what you're talking about. On top of that, with someone who is trying to explain to you. This is like you're arguing with a Chemist that water isn't H20. Then you want to ridicule me for correcting you... There has to be a limit somewhere.


Just as I stated earlier. If you are the one proclaiming that something out of the ordinary is happening, then the onus is on you to prove it. Else, your claim will be dismissed. That is how life works.

You: "Senator X is cheating on his wife"..

Senator: "Prove it, I've been with my wife during most of my free times and I have little communication with any other woman"

You: "You haven't said anything to say that you weren't cheating!! Prove to me that you weren't cheating!!!"



It's called context. I've stated multiple times over before that statement that no one likes war. Not only that, I stated multiple times that Wiki-leaks is just a publicity stunt to play on people's emotions and make the US look bad. That has been said throughout this whole thread. Since the topic of this thread is "wiki-leaks", it should have been obvious that I'm talking about people whose purpose is to make the US look bad.



This is all on topic, these go along with the previous quote above this (your inability to grasp the concept, but your ability to assume the stupid) along with the earlier response in this post about this having nothing to do with principle, but your opinion of the war. Given how you are telling me to "stay on topic" further proves my point that this is not about principle. Your emotional attachment to the latter is far less so as a result, it seems "off topic". If it were about concept, you would realize that its the same thing.

Nope. You're wrong.

Korea is a peninsula that is connected to the Chinese mainland with a border commonly designated by a series of rivers. North Korea is between China and South Korea, therefore is part of the peninsula.

What you're implying is that you could call only the part of Florida south of Orlando the peninsula, which is simply retarded.

Wrong again.

North Korea is a country. South Korea is a country. The geographical (geological?) feature on which they are both located is the Korean Peninsula.

you don't get it!! He's been there.

It's only one half of the peninsula.





No they're not. look at a map.

I did look at the map, hence why I said what I said.

Yes it's half, half of the Korean Peninsula.

The Korean Peninsula is in reference to both North Korea and South Korea. By definition, The country of South Korea is also a peninsula. Since the entire conversation was in reference to ONLY SOUTH KOREA, the terminology "The whole peninsula" (which is used by the people who live there) is also correct.

Ergo: You are wrong.

Edit: If I was talking about both countries but only meant one country then you would have a point.

Edited, Nov 7th 2010 10:34pm by Almalieque

Edited, Nov 7th 2010 10:43pm by Almalieque

I can't believe that anyone could possibly be this stupid.

"Peninsula: an area of land almost completely surrounded by water except for an isthmus connecting it with the mainland."

US Map, for reference of why you're off your rocker.



No. Just no.

Again, a peninsula denotes a geographic formation. It does not denote a country, or a national or state boundary. By definition, the country of South Korea is not a peninsula. It is, by definition part of a peninsula. There is only one peninsula, the Korean peninsula, which encapsulates both countries.

Your rhetoric doesn't make sense, either. The overall context of the thread does not rationalize your misuse of the words. That's not how the english language works.


This is all just emblematic of the fact that you'll fight tooth and nail against reason itself to keep from admitting even the slightest error on your part.

It's insane how stupid and obstinate you are. Completely fucking insane.

Edited, Nov 7th 2010 4:17pm by Eske

The entire state of Florida isn't a peninsula, you @#%^ing idiot.

When you start trying to argue that Mississippi is a peninsula, a light should go off your brain that lets you know that your argument has lost all touch with reality. It would for any normal, sane person, at least.

I was going to link a whole bunch of definitions and citations, but then I realized that there's really no point. You've clearly gone full ******. And everybody knows you never go full ******.

Edited, Nov 7th 2010 5:12pm by Eske