“譚反美”又再一派胡言當網友係傻仔

樓主開post出唻話主持
網友唔同觀點就扣人分,你小氣就唔好開post啦
唔差在扣埋我喇,你個張相同你個人一樣,成個低能仔咁
1

評分次數

f
篤喇星, 叫版主ban埋我啦....

不過, 篤喇星你鬧主持喎....
1

評分次數

公平地說, 美國警察出名"trigger happy",
正常的交通調查, 司機一有奇怪的舉動,
都分分鐘吃蓮子羹, 何況10年來寫明 "dead or alive",
給你是海豹突擊隊, 你有沒有那麼愚蠢, 冒生命危險要捉活的.
總結雙方的報告, 傷亡結果, 分明海豹突擊隊一見男性就殺,
因此, 拖拉登出正廳, 上直升機前補兩下有什麼奇怪?
至於國際法, 美國向來喜歡做就做, 什麼都不簽死,
例子有京都議定書,禁止地雷,集束炸彈, 等等.
而且美國的軍事人員和美國國民在和美國軍事合作的國家大都會享有絕對的司法豁免權,
所以在伊拉克,阿富汗,德國,日本,韓國,台灣,
軍隊和政府僱員的美國國民只能交由美國法院或軍事法庭審判,
主權國家不能干預.
本帖最後由 dukelasingh 於 22-5-2011 22:36 編輯
公平地說, 美國警察出名"trigger happy",
正常的交通調查, 司機一有奇怪的舉動,
都分分鐘吃蓮子羹, 何況10年來寫明 "dead or alive",
給你是海豹突擊隊, 你有沒有那麼愚蠢, 冒生命危險要捉活的.
總結雙方的報告, ...
keni 發表於 22-5-2011 13:42
公平地說, 在馬路或公路上執行正常交通調查截停車輛﹐
非常禮貌地Mister 前﹐Miss 後﹐
Thank you 前﹐Have a nice day 後的﹐同樣是美國警察。
司機一有奇怪的舉動, 當然﹐自然要吃蓮子羹, 還用猶豫﹖
與任何普通人一樣﹐美國警察的一條人命﹐同樣重要。
總結雙方的報告, 傷亡結果,
分明是海豹突擊隊的目的是要用任何方式完成任務﹐
為保障全世界人類的性命財產﹐除掉惡魔。
拉登在行動中被殺﹐是正常的KIA (killed in action),
於是在整體計劃中原先安排好的拉登審判團﹐
因未能將拉登活捉﹐便要解散。
國際法律, 世界上任何國家當然包括美國﹐
都是陽奉陰違﹐本身利益行先﹐
濫用司法豁免權亦然﹐有什麼奇怪?
只是最肆無忌憚﹐厚顏無恥﹐
連最起碼的普世道德標準都懶得去理﹐
即連戲都唔做的﹐
大有人在﹐輪不到美國。
本帖最後由 dukelasingh 於 23-5-2011 19:03 編輯

這裡有人發表膠論﹐認為中共不等同中國﹐
試想當中國沒有民主政治﹐中共實行一黨專政極權統治﹐
當中國共產黨實質上支配著全國資源﹐包辦了全國事務﹐
這就像一只荷包蛋中有的蛋黃﹐一杯奶茶中有的奶﹐
你要吃喝麼不吃喝﹖還是分開來吃喝﹖
於是﹐在奧運頒奬台上,當國歌高奏國旗升起,
或在電視型幕中﹐當神州七號劃破長空飛向月球﹐
又或者國產航母建成下水, 當七彩旗幟飄飄飛揚。。。﹐
你會感到自豪,感到高興而熱淚盈眶﹖
不理會這一切背後的那種種虛假﹐陰謀﹐冤屈﹐醜惡﹐悲慘。。。﹖
中華民族老伯性們的痛苦﹐受壓迫﹐血汗和眼淚﹖
中共不等同中國﹐是自欺欺人的盲毛式的自慰。
樓主:  你做咗老襯都仲霎吓霎吓,二次大戰末一九四五年,美利堅合眾國瞞着「中華民國」和「大韓民國」,秘密跟前蘇聯訂立《雅爾達密約》,內容是前蘇聯「可以」出兵進入中華民國東北,對付日軍。
前蘇聯因為害怕日本皇軍, ...
唐伯虎 發表於 11-5-2011 16:47
You are quite wrong.  It wasn't a secret at all.  The Allies requested USSR to declare war on Japan and attack the Japanese forces in Asia.  USSR just didn't want to risk its own forces against Japan.  And 「中華民國」as one of the five main partners in the Allies, agreed.  And 「大韓民國」didn't exist.  It was formed after 1945.

Please get your history right first, unless you want exchange of ignorance instead of knowledge.
Regards,
_____________________
Big Boss 不是在當官,是在做人
铁道部发言人王勇平:“我想对一些愚昧人士说句真心话,不要试图跟政府斗、跟国家斗、跟共产党斗,最后的结果无非只会引火焚身,政府说什么,就是什么!你懂吗?”
我爸是县长,在永和我爸就是国法 我爸是李刚!字双江! 這樣的奇蹟你信不信,反正我是信。
53# keni

"總結雙方的報告, 傷亡結果, 分明海豹突擊隊一見男性就殺, "

You are wrong. In situations like this, you don't spend time figuring out the gender of the opponent. You shoot first.  You don't even have time to figure out whether your opponent is armed, much less what with.  And you shoot too kill - torso shots, at the heart if you can.  Head shots mean you missed.  And bin Laden's wife was not killed because the shot missed, not because they want to keep her alive.  She didn't get the second shot because the Seals was too busy shooting bin Laden instead of her.  And after bin Laden was killed, and she was incapacitated, then they have time to sort things out and probably decide not to give her the second bullet after that.  

By the way, the normal shot is a three shot burst.  Not single shots.  I guess one of those shot at bin Laden missed, and that's why he got only two bullet holes.

In a situation like this, there is no time to think.  You don't know who you are shooting at, and you do not know what he/she is capable of.

And I have no doubt the order was to kill, not "dead or alive".  There is too much trouble if bin Laden was arrested alive.  Just look back at what kind of legal and political trouble there were when Sadam was arrested.
Regards,
_____________________
Big Boss 不是在當官,是在做人
铁道部发言人王勇平:“我想对一些愚昧人士说句真心话,不要试图跟政府斗、跟国家斗、跟共产党斗,最后的结果无非只会引火焚身,政府说什么,就是什么!你懂吗?”
我爸是县长,在永和我爸就是国法 我爸是李刚!字双江! 這樣的奇蹟你信不信,反正我是信。
53# keni

"總結雙方的報告, 傷亡結果, 分明海豹突擊隊一見男性就殺, "

You are wrong. In situations like this, you don't spend time figuring out the gender of the opponent. You shoot first.  You don't  ...
bigboss1234 發表於 23-5-2011 00:27
In police training, you aim for the torso; in sniper training, you aim for the mouth; in military, they just teach you react to whatever expose. Your mentality will change if the military order doesn't specific for the target's survival. In addition, if you are using an automatic weapon, it is a short burst, as you can't really count how many rounds will come out.
公平地說, 在馬路或公路上執行正常交通調查截停車輛﹐
非常禮貌地Mister 前﹐Miss 後﹐
Thank you 前﹐Have a nice day 後的﹐同樣是美國警察。
司機一有奇怪的舉動, 當然﹐自然要吃蓮子羹, 還用猶豫﹖
與任何普 ...
dukelasingh 發表於 22-5-2011 20:28
You are messing up comments and facts.
Facts can be disputed or debated; however, comments can only be questioned, because they are just representing personal views.
You are not disputing the fact that the navy Seals had killed Bin Laden and other unarmed-non-resisting members in actions; you are not disputing the fact that the US isn't obeying all the international rules she had set for others to follow; then what's wrong with Doctor Tam's comments?
Is the US perfect? No. Is the US the worst nation on earth? No. Then what's wrong with saying "it is half empty", instead of claiming "it is half full" or "More full than the others"?
本帖最後由 dukelasingh 於 23-5-2011 07:04 編輯
You are messing up comments and facts.
Facts can be disputed or debated; however, comments can only be questioned, because they are just representing personal views.
You are not disputing the fact ...
keni 發表於 23-5-2011 02:28
長時間有聽呢個節目嘅網友都好清楚﹐譚先生並非發表個人意見﹐而是一而再再而三以i其主持的身份刻意散播反美言論。 譚先生不是講﹕“我認為....”﹐而是講﹕“我同你講....”。在其它外邊的節目例如講東講西﹐面對著例如馬鼎盛先生這類有高度分析能力之輩﹐同樣是講拉登之死﹐他就噤若寒蟬﹐完全沒有了所謂的“個人意見”﹐有若劉佩瓊之唔敢講艾未未。 好明顯﹐聰明嘅網友都識得分別什麼是facts,甚麼是comments, 不用閣下你來担心和為譚先生保駕護航。