Thread: German Troops

I think the isolationist/defensive approach is the best, Germany aught to stay out of it IMO. There was a reason we were the victims of the terrorism, and I think it had something to do with ........ing other people off by getting involved in their affairs.

>No, it's disgusting. Problem is, it's also an "undeniable right". Freedom of speech shouldn't extend to hatemongers like the KKK, neo-Nazis, or any groups like them that preach them same sorts of ass backwards "thought".<

Yeah, freedom of speech, as long as you agree with that speech.

I don't think so.

Death or Capture or both? What do you guys think? Should he be killed on sight (most likely will happen if he is seen... reality) or caught and put in prison, or caught and put to death?

I dont think he will ever see the inside of a cell. As soon as he's located he will be popped. Who the hell wants to have a massive public excecution on tv? Hundreds of demonstrations......the legality of such an act.........What will that help.

On the other hand who wants the guy to go on behind prison bars? Everytime one of these evil b#stards hijacks a plane or kidnaps some one it will be "Free Bin Laden". Also it's a massive hassle to keep him.....who has him...the US? That would just be an invite for every terrorist to come and attack.

Nah....he will be killed in private......a dead martyr is better than a live one in many cases, and the sooner he's dead...the sooner the world will forget him.

>Just a quick question: How many terrorists have been caught so far thanks to the Nato's operation?

Probably none. NATOs mission is not to catch terrorists. If our troops catch one, by german law, he'd get life. After 15 years, he's out. I seriously hope the US guys get him and toast him. NATOs mission is to ensure safety of the Afghan people and provide assistance to the government in keeping the peace and doing police tasks.

>but it's very hard to forget the past. Perhaps if only a very small number were allowed to go, but otherwise I don't think it's right.

Thats what I meant. I don't think anyone actually believes we are trying to conquer the world again, but if our troops cause hard feelings just because they come from Germany, maybe it's better to hold them back.
It's only about 1.200 Soldiers in a joint taskforce under UK command.

>if they are the killing machines you say they are.

It's not like we have an army of genetically enhanced murderers... it's just a special force that doesn't have to fear comparison with Seals or SAS. Maybe half a thousand men. I didn't know we had such a force until it was offered to be used in anti-terror missions. Quite a surprise... now I know where my taxes vanish to. And I'm not sure I'm happy about it.


Isolist approach:

Hm. Yes and no. Standing on the sidelines watching is nice and comfortable. We did this for the last years. But I don't think we can be a reliable partner for NATO for example by only giving verbal assistance. How much of an equal partnership is one guy talking and one guy acting ? Acting might not always be the right thing. Minding your own business has been quite ok in the past. But sometimes, looking away is a crime, too. If someone is killing your neighbour, and you just stand there looking at him, it's a criminal act. It might be enough to call the police, but the police is nothing but some selected people from the community who will arrive and help the victim. It would strengthen the community, if there were more than one policeman. If someone else could take the nightshift.
If German troops aren't needed in the mission, I can ensure you that every single soldier is happy to stay home and safe. But we would be a lousy partner if we wouldn't offer assistance when we can afford it.

I think germany should finally release years of pent up blood lust and whoop the crud out of the al queda.

But seriously. Germany shouldn't just be a helpless bystander anymore. They have the force, hitler's gone, no more nazis. What more can you ask for before we let them fight again?

Why sit by and let a powerful force go unused because of the past?

> Yeah, freedom of speech, as long as you agree with that speech.

That's not exactly what I mean. My right to swing my fist ends at your nose. If someone says things that lead to church burning, lynching, and other losses of life, that should be controlled.

>>Why sit by and let a powerful force go unused because of the past?
My point exactly.

>>It's not like we have an army of genetically enhanced murderers
That is not what I meant. I haven't heard much of the German army before. So I don't know what they are capable of. What I actually mean is if they are like the Seals or SAS, then I would sent them. But there is no point of sending forces to such a difficult terrain that aren’t well trained.

I keep saying the wrong things in this post, what is happening to me
nv, can you check your pm please

Checked the pm. No prob.

>I haven't heard much of the German army before.

Hehe. For a reason. Don't get the regular conscript guys into a fight. Lichtenstein could march to Berlin and back while we try to get the ammo supply organized If anyone got the impression that we have a nice, powerful, organized army, I can calm your fears... we couldn't conquer the world if you send it by FedEx to Berlin. I'm just talking about the special forces. Which seem to be up to date... considering how much money went into that, I guess building an aircraft carrier would have been cheaper.

But indeed, besides the KSK, for the afghan terrain, German GebirgsJäger would be perfect.

Freedom of speech is nice. But if someone preaches violence and hate, he is misusing his freedom. Freedom does not mean lack of control. Freedom means that you have to control yourself instead of being watched by someone else. If you don't... too bad.
Opinions have no morals and can't be good or bad. Only actions can be categorized this way. But trying to convince someone of your opinion is an action. Making him commit a crime is a crime itself. And failing in a criminal act doesn't make it legal. So trying to make someone commit a crime is illegal.


[For non-europeans: GebirgsJäger = Mountaineers, Lichtenstein is a european state that is too small to field a professional soccer team ( 11 people ). ]

if they are the killing machines you say they are.

It wasn't me who said that, but I did write the same thing and deleted it before I pressed the the "submit reply" button. when I read it I thought it was me who posted it. what is it with me and this post I can't keep my head with this one. Before my next reply I'll read the whole thread again and think twice before I post.

>>Checked the pm. No prob.
thx

>>Being of German descent

Hey, I'm half german! I want a cookie!

>>No, it's disgusting. Problem is, it's also an "undeniable right". Freedom of speech shouldn't extend to hatemongers like the KKK, neo-Nazis, or any groups like them that preach them same sorts of ass backwards "thought".<<

I agree, but we can't just have selective bearing of rights. "Yes, you can have freedom of speech...so can you, you too, you as well...wait a minute! You can't!"
The thing is that our forefathers (sp?) had no clue we'd have hate-lovin little pieces of %^#! like them. They thought we'd all live in harmony with good people...yaddayaddayadda...a few centuries later we have flag burners, and the like. Hey, if you don't like the country get your arse out. Don't think anyone would be sad to see you go.

>>Yeah, freedom of speech, as long as you agree with that speech. <<

Not particularly. Noone wants to hear or see or hear their hate. I sure don't. Sure, they're entitled to their opionions, but if you ain't got something nice to say don't say anything at all, remember? Now if only the whole world could follow that thought

>>Death or Capture or both? What do you guys think? Should he be killed on sight (most likely will happen if he is seen... reality) or caught and put in prison, or caught and put to death?<<

Doesn't matter. He's going to die either way. You have to realize that:

scenario 1:
He gets caught and put in prison. Do you really think anyone in there is gonna make it easy for him? No. They'll kill him.
scenario 2,3,4,5...etc:
we kill him somehow

see? my logic is un-beatable

> if they are the killing machines you say they are.

OK, I embellished a bit, ok? Jeez... Point is, you make them sound like the Seals or SAS, and that's what I think about them, so that's why I said it...

>I agree, but we can't just have selective bearing of rights.

We sure can, and do. Everyone has a right to bear arms. As long as you pass screenings. Everyone can vote. As long as you're 18. We do it all the time. There's no reason people that preach things that are meant to do nothing but harm should be allowed to. I'd be arrested for shouting "Fire!" in a theater - why doesn't freedom of speech cover that?

Another thing is that alot of the people hear are saying that we shouldn't be able to say anything that will offend someone. Well lets just say my grandmother died from being hung(she wasn't really infact she is still alive). Then you say are tieing knots and tie a slip knot. Well now im offended even if you didnt know about my grandmother. Should you be punished?

Since I think this was directed at me, I think I'll respond... No one ever said offensive speech shouldn't be allowed. If it wasn't, I'd probably be permanently gagged. The only reason groups like the KKK are around is to cause harm. No other reason.

Also, (ignoring the fact that tying a know isn't talking) how does your little analogy make any sense? I didn't harm your grandmother (either in real life or in your example), nor threaten to harm her (again, either in real life or in your example) so what does me tying a knot have to do with anything?

um dude, the KKK _do_ cause harm...haven't you ever watched those old movies with KKK beating the crud out of any black person in their path?


>>I'd be arrested for shouting "Fire!" in a theater - why doesn't freedom of speech cover that?<<

Good point...

>>umm.. if you drop the flag or it touches the ground your spose to burn it. I've burn about 10 flags ceremoniously yet I'm a very proud American. <<

Now you know that's not what I meant...Haven't you ever heard of flag burners? They kinda take normal flags, protest the government, and burn the flags. Plus, it was just an example...


And about the grandmother thing...I get what you're saying but that would just make you hyper-sensitive. Not saying you can't offend anyone, but when you hate (the key word here...do I hate your grandma so much I talk about knots?), or target large groups with that hate (gays, jews, african americans...you name it, someone hates it), then it becomes wrong. Hell, it was wrong to being with...

Anyone can hate, most people do, but why bother us with it? We surely don't care.