Brave Iraqi Army Officer, Stood his Ground, refused to Betray Iraq, Paid with his Life!

[sevlex]

No, spoken like a person who values life.

If you were next in line after this guy, would you have taken one to the head, or just lied and taken some BS oath before trying to escape?

Step into the boxcar, bitte.

[Helen Keller]

Billy Bad Ass club.



I'm thinking they're going to be having extinction issues very shortly.

[FunkyPertwee]

Billy Bad Ass club.



I'm thinking they're going to be having extinction issues very shortly.

If the alternative to extinction is to live as a slave under sharia law, extinction just might be preferable.

[Kadmos]

Step into the boxcar, bitte.

If accurate, that is a tactically bad way to run an invasion. You always want your enemy to believe that those who surrender will receive decent treatment and be allowed to live.

Regardless of Oswald's "die before submit" BS, the fact is that the vast majority of prisoners do in fact become pretty docile and wait it out. It's simply what people do.

If the enemy believes that surrender equals death, then obviously they will stop surrendering and can only flee or fight. Flight may be good for the invading force, but if they chose fight, things obviously become more difficult.

And if flight is particularly difficult, say you are surrounded by desert and enemy countries, then fight may be the only option.

Not only is this a heinous obvious war crime by Isis, but it's tactically unsound.

[1 Patriot-of-many]

True Muslims are animals, it's that simple.

[l921428x]

well there was the ISIS videos about 3 weeks ago, you boob took it down, where they were just driving down the highway doing drive by shootings with their ak's.
killing people, seemingly, for the hell of it. you have to be willing to do the same or these types will always win.

[Oswald Bastable]

If accurate, that is a tactically bad way to run an invasion. You always want your enemy to believe that those who surrender will receive decent treatment and be allowed to live.

No doubt that will be a great consolation to the family and friends of those men.

[Kadmos]

well there was the ISIS videos about 3 weeks ago, you boob took it down, where they were just driving down the highway doing drive by shootings with their ak's.
killing people, seemingly, for the hell of it. you have to be willing to do the same or these types will always win.

I think I watched that today, let me see if I can find it....



That the thing...?

[Kadmos]

No doubt that will be a great consolation to the family and friends of those men.

I wouldn't think so.

[Kadmos]

You are a pretty smart guy, but this post of yours is the most clear evidence of your true identity, and that being a liar and a coward.

I have no doubt the god of this world would understand your choice.

The God of heaven, on the other hand, knows what it means to not compromise, even to the point of being tortured and nailed to a cross. Of course your god has convinced you such things are only fables...stories made up by men who were so foolish as too believe the lie to the point of also suffering torture and death without compromise.

Unlike you, I choose to go with the fools.

My God is the same god Jesus prayed to

History has made it necessary for Jews to lie about our religion on occasion. To accept forced conversion to save our lives, our families lives, and the continuation of our religion.

Those who choose to make themselves martyrs in that particular situation are said to have "sanctified the name of God" and are looked at as incredibly noble, but this is deemed to be outside the capability of normal men. It's difficult to properly explain. Yes, those who refuse to convert to save their lives are seen as holy...but there is little expectation to actually do this.

Jews have a history of occasionally having to become "secret Jews", where they publicly "converted" but remain Jewish.

And this general idea is supported even these days in secular common law..."under duress"...a contract made under duress is not binding.

If a man comes up to you after you have filled your tank with gas, pulls a gun and sticks it in your face and says "Sell me your car for 1 dollar or die", and you accept, you didn't enter into a legal contract to sell your car , thus making it not a theft.

Don't take my quick reply previously on this as being willing to generally lie. I've given this subject thought previously. Christians in the US don't get told by their parents "Once we get on the road (for a vacation heading west or south, in the US) don't tell people we are Jewish". We had a kind of hobby farm in rural Missouri, my brother and I were told not to let people know we were Jewish. That type of thing really makes you think as a child. It effects the way you have to look at people.

These days it likely wouldn't make so much, but those days it was a totally unnecessary risk.

At any rate, lying is wrong, in general. But it's also something we do on a fairly daily basis..mostly because the truth in more hurtful. The casual acquaintance asks you in you can help him move on Sunday, if you aren't going to do it, then it's kinder to lie and say "Sorry, I already have plans" rather than "No, I don't want to, I don't even like you that much, certainly not enough to want to help you move a bunch of shit"

To think it's ok to lie to save someone's feelings, but not ok to save someone's life is ridiculous. The really dishonorable lies are the one's you don't need to tell, but tell for your own personal pleasure or gain. Telling a girl you're dying of cancer in order to try to get laid, or telling her you're an astronaut, or selling something as "authentic" when you know it isn't, etc.

As to your charge of cowardice, well I know I'm not one. But I'm not going to throw my life away just to puff out my chest to a murdering shitbag by acting tough. That's not "honorable" or "noble" that's just pride, and not the good kind of pride that comes from working hard and achieving something, it's pretty much selfish pride that says "I would rather die than suffer mild insult or humiliation, even if it means my family will suffer for it"

BTW, after seeing snippets on the video of the guy who "refused" on the news...I don't think he so much "refused" as had no comprehension of what was going on. He looked dazed and confused, unable to stand, and possibly unable to speak...probably some combination of heatstroke, dehydration, and shock. I don't think they killed a man who wouldn't take the oath, but one who couldn't.

[Kadmos]

I don't recall the OT Prophet Daniel acting as a secret Jew or lying to escape King Darius' punishment when the administrators and satraps plotted against him. To me a hungry lion is ultimately more terrifying than some douche with a gat, and the fact that Daniel did not yield much like the example of NT Christ followers/martyrs says a lot.

Not sure the story really supports that view. Daniel went into his own house to pray. Yes the window was open towards Jerusalem, but he simply did what he had always done, he didn't go out of his way to shove it in the kings face. Nor was he asked to denounce god or anything like that before being tossed into the pit, they just chucked him in there.

When the king goes to Daniel the next day, Daniel basically kisses his ass "may you live forever" and sort of thanks the king for proving he was innocent of the charges against him (because the lions didn't eat him)...which in fact is a lie, because he knows full well that he disobeyed the law.

Further, the men who accused him (truthfully, I might add) were then thrown to the lions along with their families, and were killed by the lions. Which apparently Daniel didn't attempt to prevent.

[Kadmos]

The story supports the traditional view just fine. Much the same as it supports the story of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego being thrown into the fiery furnace.

Can't wait to hear your 2014 updated interpretation of that one as well

Yeah, I'm not in the mood to recount the entire bible here.

But you brought up Daniel...did I get it wrong? And if so, how?

Is it not a lie to use incorrect proof of innocence when you know you are guilty? Did he not "butter up" the king a bit? I'm not saying Daniel was bad, but the story is how it is. I guess it all could have been written to make everyone look perfect, he could have stood up defiantly against the king and say "Slay me if you wish, but I will not stop praying to God".

But he didn't. He essentially tricked the king into believing that he was innocent of the initial charges... is this true or not true?

What, in your opinion, is the "traditional view"? Does it actually coincide with what the book says, or is it just wishful thinking?

[5.56NATO]

If accurate, that is a tactically bad way to run an invasion. You always want your enemy to believe that those who surrender will receive decent treatment and be allowed to live.

Regardless of Oswald's "die before submit" BS, the fact is that the vast majority of prisoners do in fact become pretty docile and wait it out. It's simply what people do.

If the enemy believes that surrender equals death, then obviously they will stop surrendering and can only flee or fight. Flight may be good for the invading force, but if they chose fight, things obviously become more difficult.

And if flight is particularly difficult, say you are surrounded by desert and enemy countries, then fight may be the only option.

Not only is this a heinous obvious war crime by Isis, but it's tactically unsound.

Lol it's funny you stick to that line when they execute most everyone they capture, so why surrender at all?
Better to take some with you, then the next poor bastard doesn't have so many to face.

[Kadmos]

Lol it's funny you stick to that line when they execute most everyone they capture, so why surrender at all?

That's what I said. It's a tactically bad decision because it prevents them from surrendering. An invading army would want the enemy to surrender, not to possibly fight to the death.