Akbar Sentenced to Death for Grenade Attack

[Fly Navy]

Wouldn't killing him through the State give other fundamentalists more reason to hate us--as if they feel they need more, but i'm sure you get the point--?

Are you kidding me? The fundamentalists whackos we're fighting are ALL about capital punishment. Look at how many people the Taliban executed. Fvck them. We're not trying to make friends with these dipsh!ts. We're trying to kill them.

And as far as rehabilitation for those on life sentences, I believe there is something to the idea of redeeming one's spiritual self after the act, despite whether or not he is let back into society.

He committed murder and assault on his own troops. Do you know what that can do to unit morale? Do you fully realize what he did? If I remember correctly, he converted to Islam (ok, so what), became radical (uh oh!), and killed his own fellow soldiers (oh HELL NO). He wanted death for America. He's no longer worthy of the title "human" in my opinion. He is no different than an enemy spy or infiltrator. Oh, except for the fact that I can have respect for an enemy. I'm with a couple other's here... he never would have left the scene alive.

I can see some of your argument and you may be anti-death penalty, which is your deal, but remember what we're dealing with and realize there are always exceptions. I'd say this one is a good qualifier.

 

[bunk22]

Wouldn't killing him through the State give other fundamentalists more reason to hate us--as if they feel they need more, but i'm sure you get the point--? And as far as rehabilitation for those on life sentences, I believe there is something to the idea of redeeming one's spiritual self after the act, despite whether or not he is let back into society.

Really, who gives a **** about the fundamentalists. We do what's right for our laws, for our reasons, not to appease those who hate us. If this POS wants to redeem himself, let he and God sort it out. Just my very opinionated.......opinion.

 

[Goober]

Lethal injection takes too much procedure. Two words - electric bleachers. I'll supply the cold cranking amps. We can set 'em all up at once.

 

[red_stang65]

Really, who gives a **** about the fundamentalists. We do what's right for our laws, for our reasons, not to appease those who hate us.

Now, while I can, to an extent, relate to this idea of relativism, would it really fly here in the US if another country tried to pull the same statement with an American life on the line? Remember Bush and previous administrations' opinions against the International Criminial Court--something I'm def. not for, but that's another issue--? I don't believe we can just say, "Hey, we're the US and that's enough for us to do what we want." I know we as a state don't typically take that stance, but I'm afraid there are enough individuals out there who believe this would be a justifiable action. I urge us to have more foresight into thinking about consequences before making such outlandish assertions.

Are you kidding me? The fundamentalists whackos we're fighting are ALL about capital punishment. Look at how many people the Taliban executed. Fvck them. We're not trying to make friends with these dipsh!ts. We're trying to kill them.

Recall how up in arms the Islamic world has become over the prisoners in Guatanamo Bay. How much more would they feel justified if a relatively public representative of their cause were to be put to death?

Again, just bringing up some different outlooks, here.

 

[skidkid]

They hate regardless and you are applying reason to those who have foresaken reason for rage. This unfortunately is a prevelant opinion in this nation, made possible by the competence of her defenders. This guy is not a poster child for the Islamic world, he was an American soldier who turned his back on his oath, his comrades and his country in the most cowardly and villianous way. There is no lower form of life. A jury has sentecned him to death and I hope it is carried out swiftly.
As for the Arab street they hateed us before Gitmo, before Afghanistan and before Iraq but maybe now they fear us as well. I will point to Syria and Libya as examples that this is the case. Healthy debate is a good thing I am assuming you are against the death penalty in any case which though I dont share that view I respect it. If however you are against the death penalty only in this case with the hope that "rehabilitating" this parasite will somehow garner love for us on the Arab street then you are foolishly naive.

 

[red_stang65]

Healthy debate is a good thing I am assuming you are against the death penalty in any case which though I dont share that view I respect it. If however you are against the death penalty only in this case with the hope that "rehabilitating" this parasite will somehow garner love for us on the Arab street then you are foolishly naive.

skidkid, you are right in assuming that I am against the death penalty in general. Do I believe that rehabilitation is possible for this man? Of course; though, I believe rehabilitation is possible for anyone in some regard--call me a spiritual optimist or naive...just what I believe. If the Pope could speak with his would-be assassin and forgive him, while still not condoning the man's actions and he still serving time in prison, could we not all learn a lesson there? I'm not a peace monger by any means, except when some speak about the only deserving punishment for a person is death.

This guy is not a poster child for the Islamic world, he was an American soldier who turned his back on his oath, his comrades and his country in the most cowardly and villianous way.

You're right...perhaps I am giving this man too much credit in that his punishment will most likely not invoke some sort of united Islamist movement in retalliation. Can our actions in this case still impact our image across the globe, however? Most definitely. On the other hand, so can the incident with the Italian agent being shot in the rescue of the journalist--a sad series of events, which I completely understand and side with the actions of those US soldiers now in question. I only think we have to do our best to forsee the possible blowback of our actions and what it may do to affect the international system in which we are a part.

 

[bunk22]

Now, while I can, to an extent, relate to this idea of relativism, would it really fly here in the US if another country tried to pull the same statement with an American life on the line? Remember Bush and previous administrations' opinions against the International Criminial Court--something I'm def. not for, but that's another issue--? I don't believe we can just say, "Hey, we're the US and that's enough for us to do what we want." I know we as a state don't typically take that stance, but I'm afraid there are enough individuals out there who believe this would be a justifiable action. I urge us to have more foresight into thinking about consequences before making such outlandish assertions.

Number one, your example doesn't compare (apples and oranges) being that we tried an American soldier. He is not a foriegn soldier but a Islamic convert in the US military. So number two, the US can simply say we are going to follow our laws and carry out the sentence imposed by those laws. It's real simple here, especially in time of war. This soldier turned on his own countrymen, attacked and killed two (?) of them. He is coward, a traitor, a murderer, was tried by a military court, found guilty and is now going to face death as his punishment.

Are you sure the US military is what you want to do? Naval aviation included? You seem a little of the soft side to me. Sure, the military wants rational thinkers but they also want hard charging, motivated, extremely patriotic individuals. You're coming across as a bit cock weak.

 

[Fly Navy]

Recall how up in arms the Islamic world has become over the prisoners in Guatanamo Bay. How much more would they feel justified if a relatively public representative of their cause were to be put to death?

Again, just bringing up some different outlooks, here.

Again, I don't give a damn and neither should the country. These people are the enemy. They get better treatment than what we're all going to get in SERE. Their living conditions are better than the soldiers that made the trip to Bagdad. FVCK THEM. You can't reason with these folks. This isn't like fighting Germany or Japan or hypothetically Russia. Don't you understand? I don't think you fully do. We are NOT in the business with negotiating with the psychos. We are trying to crush and defeat them. We aren't trying to resume normal trade relations, we aren't trying to get our countries to cooperate again like a normal war.

You do realize they hated us before this right? You do realize not punishing this guy would be the worst thing this country could do in a long time? Putting him to death will not increase their hate. They could care less. They already want to kill us all.

Do some soul searching bro, cause this isn't a very good attitude to go out there and fight them. Sounds like your on the side of fluffing them. This is wrong.

We appreciate your candor, but think it through.

 

[red_stang65]

Are you sure the US military is what you want to do? Naval aviation included? You seem a little of the soft side to me. Sure, the military wants rational thinkers but they also want hard charging, motivated, extremely patriotic individuals. You're coming across as a bit cock weak.

Excuse me?! You think that just because I'm bringing up a different opinion here, and voicing an idea of morality that plays an integral part of my life, instead of being a "hard charger" and chasing this man to the gallows plays me as weak?! You have to be kidding...Do you not believe it to be possible for a person (read, a sailor, aviator, soldier, etc) to be on one hand intrinsicly motivated to defend his/her country at all costs while at the same time understanding the sanctity of life and valuing it? Given, there are times when some lives are lost at the hands of such people, but the majority of them come as a result of self defense or when they believe all other relevent means have failed--don't take this to mean I'm a leftist who believes we didn't give diplomacy a running chance in Iraq, I feel justified in our actions there. But do take this opinion as coming from someone who is whole-heartedly dedicated to serving and defending this nation, even if that means having to take the life of someone in order to defend it. Just understand that life is still possible to be held sacred even during such times.

Please, bunk22, don't go around thinking that the only way to be dedicated to this cause of national defense requires one to be a champion of leathal injection, or other state-ordered forms of death. Would you feel better if I sided with those who think this man should not have even survived the firefight? Well, darn it, I sure can't understand why he did, as I feel the soldiers in that instance were fully justified in taking this man down. I dunno...take that for what you will...

Do some soul searching bro, cause this isn't a very good attitude to go out there and fight them. Sounds like your on the side of fluffing them. This is wrong.

I don't believe you have clearly understood my message, here. I am not of the idea of "fluffing" them--I assume you mean pandering the enemy and going at them 'soft-footedly'. And, as I mentioned to bunk22, is condoning execution the only way to come off as motivated or is it the only way to prove your dedication to the country? Please...if so, then I believe many more of us need to do some soul searching to see if we are really capable of having our own thoughts and a sense of morality in our profession.

You do realize not punishing this guy would be the worst thing this country could do in a long time?

The worst thing? I'm not sure about that, but I will grant that by not punishing this man will harm the morale of the troops in the field, and a simple life sentence in a plush jail cell is not just punishment. But I do believe there are other avenues of punishment for this man other than what is seen as the only, single alternative to the death penalty. Let your imaginations run on what may possibly be fitting for this man other than death, and I'm sure you'll find something.

 

[bunk22]

Excuse me?! You think that just because I'm bringing up a different opinion here, and voicing an idea of morality that plays an integral part of my life, instead of being a "hard charger" and chasing this man to the gallows plays me as weak?! You have to be kidding...Do you not believe it to be possible for a person (read, a sailor, aviator, soldier, etc) to be on one hand intrinsicly motivated to defend his/her country at all costs while at the same time understanding the sanctity of life and valuing it? Given, there are times when some lives are lost at the hands of such people, but the majority of them come as a result of self defense or when they believe all other relevent means have failed--don't take this to mean I'm a leftist who believes we didn't give diplomacy a running chance in Iraq, I feel justified in our actions there. But do take this opinion as coming from someone who is whole-heartedly dedicated to serving and defending this nation, even if that means having to take the life of someone in order to defend it. Just understand that life is still possible to be held sacred even during such times.

Please, bunk22, don't go around thinking that the only way to be dedicated to this cause of national defense requires one to be a champion of leathal injection, or other state-ordered forms of death. Would you feel better if I sided with those who think this man should not have even survived the firefight? Well, darn it, I sure can't understand why he did, as I feel the soldiers in that instance were fully justified in taking this man down. I dunno...take that for what you will...

You have a different opinion but IMO, it's one that comes across as more of a liberal view of things. It's difficult to make calls on the net on someone's motivation so sometimes you have to go by what's in front of you. Your comments leaned towards the touchy feely type. In this situation, a soldier who is a traitor and a murderer, there's no room for looking into the value of his life. There's no grey in this situation, it's black and white and to believe any other way is foolish. So to answer your question, I do believe a person should be a hard charger to join the military and I just don't see that in your answers. Some people are dreamers and want things that aren't for them because of the coolness factor (flying jets or helo's for the Navy). There's simply a lot more to being a pilot in the Navy than just flying aircraft. If I'm off on this one, fine, but if so, perhaps you shouldn't get so worked up about it. I will call it like I see it.

 

[Ryoukai]

Red Stang: A couple things here that bother me, feel free to respond at your leisure. People are mad about the guys we're holding in Cuba because we took them from a combat zone and are holding them as war criminals yet we deny any link to that horrible word which just so happens to change the legality of what we're doing. Comparing that situation to some cock-gobbler who decides that he's going to play God and judge whose life is worth more is like comparing Joan of Arc to Hitler...they both fought in wars and they both liked Jesus. I mean, aside from their situations and all other factors being completely different, they're exactly the same, right?
Second bone to pick, how are you able to see this as a spiritual/legal matter and hold the opinion that maybe he should be given a second chance after killing Americans when your own avatar is a Hornet carrying what look to be pointy weapons of death. Many pointy weapons of death were taken to the party over in the middle east and, oddly enough, used to bring pointy death to various characters trying to kill Americans. As I am not a member of the military, somebody can stop me if I'm sounding crazy and off base, but I question how you would think that you'd be up to the job of you yourself bringing pointy death to people who have yet to kill Americans (I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt, that they haven't had the chance to take pot shots at Marines) when you are second guessing the Government's responsibility to process this clown through the legal system you live under and ultimately, hopefully, kill him. If you have a problem with punishing people who kill Americans without any kind of rhyme or reason then I for one would not want to be trusting my life to you in any situation involving people trying their best to kill me. Maybe you should look into the lucrative career of internet blog artist and then you can decry the evils of the heartless American empire.

 

[red_stang65]

Ryoukai,

I've tolerated a lot in the past...but this is ridiculous. I cannot imagine that you have read all that I have said and still come to that conclusion. You say that I appear to have problems with using "pointy weapons of death" against the enemy. I believe I said earlier that I find violence justified in cases of war or self defense...and I'll extend that to matters of survival. With that in mind, I have no problems utilizing leathal force in subdoing a target or a threat--hence, that picture of the hornet is not quite as hypocritical as you might have believed.

Second, I never said I had a problem punishing this man for what he did. I just don't agree with the mob mentality I've seen on here what with a loud minority of people calling for this man's head on a spike--or needle in his arm, as the case may be. If you read my post previous to this, you would have read that I do not believe punishment by putting Akbar into a plush prison is just--perhaps you misconstrued this to thinking I don't believe it is just to punish him...allow me to clarify.

He should be punished. Plain enough for you? He should not be executed--in my personal beliefs. Still getting the picture? Are there alternatives? Of course...have this man walk on coals for 6 hours at a time with 30 min breaks--a suggestion. Deprive him of sleep and subject him to extremely harsh living conditions akin to that of a mexican state prison--trust me, you don't want to be there. I never...repeat NEVER said this man was free to go/innocent/should not be held culpable/etc etc etc.

Maybe you should look into the lucrative career of internet blog artist and then you can decry the evils of the heartless American empire

Are you out of your friggin grape? I wish I could reply with a somewhat more sensible answer, but I'm afraid using too big of words might continue to confuse you as you obviously haven't been paying too much attention to what I've said thus far. I'm sorry for coming off as more than irate and I don't mean to insult your intelligence in any way, but we'll see how you do when time and time again people continue put words into your mouth and judge you based on their off-base interpretations.

What, in God's green earth, leads you to think I would wish to decry the "evils of the heartless American empire?" What have I done to suggest that this is my point of view? I merely stated earlier that there are alternatives to punishment for this man other than death. Plain and oh, so friggin simple. (Please refer to my earlier statement about my desire to serve/protect/defend/etc etc etc).

I would hazard that many of you reading this would bet that I'm a democrat so far left that even Michael Moore finds me obscene. You would be very surprised to find that I'm quite a staunch right-winger (with some moderate tendencies). What I think may be throwing many of you off is that I find that morality does have a place to play in politics and the choices made by those who can influence situations.

Now, to what you started your second point off with, Ryoukai. I never suggested giving this man a second chance. That would be like letting Ted Bundy take my sister or daughter out on a date thinking that nothing will happen, he seems nice enough, despite knowing he had been convicted for numerous murders. What I opined was that I believed some sort of spiritual rehabilitation is possible with this man. There is an opportunity for him to make peace with God...if you disagree with that, then, my friend, that is something between you and your beliefs about "the powers that be." This is where I think some of you may become hidebound...just because I think there is a chance for (spiritual) rehabilitation, it does not follow that I then think he should be released into the public. You are limiting the possibilities...think outside the box. One can be rehabilitated but still continue to serve his/her time in punishment. I remember as a child that, even if I told my parents why I was being grounded/spanked/what have you and that I understood their point in doing so, I was never let off easy; I still had to pay the time, as should this man.

About the prisoners in Cuba.
I was speaking more about those fundamentalists who are enraged by the idea that their bretheren are being held captive. I then drew a correlation from Cuba to the man in question. If Akbar believes in the same ideas as the fundamentalists, and the fundamentalists are upset about their bretheren being in prison/punished, does it follow that they would be angered by Akbar's imprisonment? I believe so, though an actual Logician may find issue with my argument.

Finally...
I believe what we all must come to terms with here, though, is that none of us (at least, those who have spoken out here) seem to have any real personal attachment to the issue in question. By personal, I mean none of us knew the soldiers involved in the firefight, none of us knew those who perished from such a cowardly, sangfroid act. Instead, we sit here and read the article and then voice our opinions free from biased influences and are granted a chance to armchair quarterback. I know our responses would be much different if we actually had some claim to this depressing incident. Take that for what it's worth......

 

[bunk22]

Finally...
I believe what we all must come to terms with here, though, is that none of us (at least, those who have spoken out here) seem to have any real personal attachment to the issue in question. By personal, I mean none of us knew the soldiers involved in the firefight, none of us knew those who perished from such a cowardly, sangfroid act. Instead, we sit here and read the article and then voice our opinions free from biased influences and are granted a chance to armchair quarterback. I know our responses would be much different if we actually had some claim to this depressing incident. Take that for what it's worth......

This isn't a mishap investigation where we armchair the pilot. This was a criminal act in as black and white as you can get it. It doesn't matter if we were at the incident or knew those who died. This American soldier turned on his compatriots and killed them. We are reacting to the punishment which is absolutely fair and honorable in this case. If there's bias here, it's because most of us are American sailors or soldiers who kind of take a liking to our side and react harshly to murderous traitors. His punishment fits his crime, period.

 

[Road Program]

Damn...if no one is gonna do it, I guess it will be me...I have to jump to red_stang's defense. While we in the military don't quite have all the same rights as your average, we still have the right to think what we want to think, and in the scope of a public, relatively (depening on how you look at it) anonymous forum, speak our minds. If we were not allowed to think what we wanted to think, what kind of military would that make us? The kind of military that has "political officers" to ensure we followed the party line both in thought and in deed?

Now, all that being said...

I think this Akbar guy should die, and swiftly. And while we're in the killing mood, let's see if we can re-try John Young and the rest of the Peace Committee and give them what they deserve.

 

[bunk22]

Damn...if no one is gonna do it, I guess it will be me...I have to jump to red_stang's defense. While we in the military don't quite have all the same rights as your average, we still have the right to think what we want to think, and in the scope of a public, relatively (depening on how you look at it) anonymous forum, speak our minds. If we were not allowed to think what we wanted to think, what kind of military would that make us? The kind of military that has "political officers" to ensure we followed the party line both in thought and in deed?

Nobody's telling him how to think or follow a party line. However, I believe a certain type of "hard charger" is necessary for the military. Touchy feely need not apply.