You have seen a propaganda video by anti-American interests, and a poor one at that. Soldiers do not bother with such stupidity, they are more concerned with surviving and killing the enemy. The enemy is defined at the people shooting at you, it doesn't matter whose side they are on, or what religion they practice. Killing is purely a secular activity, religion on the other hand is political manipulation of the ignorant. No real soldier would waste there time on such activity.
2007-03-10 07:34:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by blogbaba 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
1. It can't do any more than kill them.
2. If Muslims are forbidden to eat pork, I don't believe they would incur any guilt because someone else shot some pork into them. And I'm sure no educated Muslim would worry about that aspect of the question.
3. It is obviously a tremendous lack of respect for the Mulsims, and doesn't say much for those who would do that.
It could also imply a superstition on th epart of the perpetrators.
My question, however, is: did you make that up? or did you learn about it in one of those many forwarded email messages with special hidden knowledge? Or do you actually have documented evidence ofr that?
2007-03-10 07:33:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mr Ed 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
It won't do anything to them. Unless of course the Muslim knew about it before he was shot, and even then, the bullet would do more harm than any psychological damage.
It is a traditional part of military training and indoctrination that the "enemy" is less than human. Euphemisms and insulting names are encouraged to be used. The "enemy" is given all kinds of disgusting habits and proclivities. Degrading rituals like this one (if it is true) have the sole purpose of dehumanizing the enemy, so that the soldier will feel less remorse or guilt when he kills him. It builds up the soldier's feelings of superiority and helps keep him in line with "group-think".
2007-03-10 07:38:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The British had a hard time raising an army in India when it was a colony. To make the bullets fit in the gun better, and reduce the chances of the gun jamming, they would cover the bullets in grease. They had many Muslims in the army, so they couldn't use pork grease, and couldn't use cow fat because there were many Hindus in the army.
There doesn't seem to be a problem for American soldiers.
2007-03-10 07:33:14
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Don't show the video to anyone, those soldiers may be charged with a hate crime.
The dirty heathen Muslims consider the pig to be a filthy animal, even though it's a cleaner, more noble animal than any Muslim. They do not eat pork or touch pigs. When soldiers dip the bullets in pig's blood, the Muslim who is shot by that bullet believes he will be unable to meet Allah or see his 72 virgin sheep. Supposedly, it denies them entry to paradise.
2007-03-10 07:34:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by Lord Vader 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
Nothing !!
Once they are dead, it won't make any difference if the bullet was dipped in Pig fat or not.......and they are not answerable for that ! as they didn't choose this on their own !
what next?
2007-03-10 07:40:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by ★Roshni★ 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your a fricking lier and idiot.
As for your stupid inference to pork..
the heat of the bullet burns so hot as to purify it making it sterile
KNUCKLE head.
mater of fact this question is insulting.
2007-03-10 07:41:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
That happened a very long time ado also.
I think it was about Rudyard Kipplings book in India.
No pork fat or pork, it makes them unclean.
I heard that they were going to use pig fat bombs instead of regular bombs. There will be pig fat everywhere.
2007-03-10 07:36:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by chris p 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Where did you see that?
2007-03-10 07:36:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by NONAME 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Its anti-american propaganda because we and the UN are supposed to be helping them create a liveable nation, not insult their religous beliefs.
2007-03-10 07:35:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by Marcus R. 6
·
0⤊
0⤋