US soldier kills Baghdad tiger

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2003-09-27 07:09pm

Well, he should have been shot so he doesn't go around randomly putting his arm in cages, that's for sure.

Typhonis 1 · Post by **Typhonis 1** » 2003-09-28 01:00am

isn`t there a specified method for the Zoo handlers to feed a tiger? Also what the hell were these idiots doing drunk around something as dangerous as a tiger isn`t being drunk off duty a violation of the UCMJ and grounds for a courts martial?

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2003-09-28 02:25am

Why does not the US military take intelligence tests for sanity ? Are not they supposed to be the best in the world ?

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2003-09-28 02:29am

Well there was also the whole "Being gay is illegal" but let's try to sweep under rapes and child molestations when ever possible. Let's face it. Like the CCC, the US military get's a lot of deticated civic minded good types, unfortunatly they also get kids that were recruited out of Juvie. Hell they even tried to recruit Mark when he was in jail....

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2003-09-28 02:38am

Hell they even tried to recruit Mark when he was in jail....

Could you elaborate please.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-09-28 01:51pm

Axis Kast wrote:Alyrium. Putting down "problem" animals in Yellowstone National Park is usually determined by stress levels and aggression both. In the case of the Baghdad tiger, the aggression might seem to have been limited and unavoidable, but the stress to which the animal was already subjected would no doubt have given the psychological reinforcement of the attack an expotential increase in strength. Given an animal already so out of norms, the response to the attack must have been imposed death.

An aggressive animal(provided they invade human space, like a town, on a regular basis... habitual man-hunters..not to be confused with a one-time offender like a shark or crocodile) yes should be be put down. But an animal that is in its wn space, that accepts food, or is threatened by human interference should not be. Such is the case with zoo animals. A caged animal that is not hand fed by zoo employees is not a threat, under usual circumstances. if someone is stupid enough to put their arm in the cage, they do so at their own peril, the psychological implications of an attack on humans by a zoo animal are irrelevent, because the humans were never supposed to come in contract with the animals in the first place.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-09-28 01:53pm

The Yosemite Bear wrote:Well there was also the whole "Being gay is illegal" but let's try to sweep under rapes and child molestations when ever possible. Let's face it. Like the CCC, the US military get's a lot of deticated civic minded good types, unfortunatly they also get kids that were recruited out of Juvie. Hell they even tried to recruit Mark when he was in jail....

Well, he likes guns...

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-09-28 03:11pm

Alyrium. This tiger wasn't a run-of-the-mill animal. It was fed by - and then attacked a human being. Right there it begins to associate food with people. Now, add to that weeks upon weeks of bombing in Baghdad and its effect on a caged animals psyche, and you see the argument.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-09-28 03:44pm

Axis Kast wrote:Alyrium. This tiger wasn't a run-of-the-mill animal. It was fed by - and then attacked a human being. Right there it begins to associate food with people. Now, add to that weeks upon weeks of bombing in Baghdad and its effect on a caged animals psyche, and you see the argument.

No, you see the complete fucking lack of an argument that you're trying to pass off as one....for fuck sake, it's in a cage and only dumb people are at any threat from it....

I would think being dead has a huge affect on most creatures psyche too.....

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-09-28 04:09pm

If this cage was completely safe, how the fuck was somebody able to stick an arm in the thing?

And you've still got to prove this tiger would never, ever have had access to anybody else. Period. That includes trainers.

Now do that, or I've won.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-09-28 04:12pm

Bullshit you fucking moron, look what I said, only fucking idiots like you would be at any risk. I dont have to prove it would never have contact with people again....you spew some shit about what happens in cases of animals that have free access to humans or that have a prolonged history of anti-social behaviour as if it's anything to do with a case like this.
You are so fucking stupid it actually hurts to read the shit you type.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-09-28 04:29pm

Axis Kast wrote:If this cage was completely safe, how the fuck was somebody able to stick an arm in the thing?

And you've still got to prove this tiger would never, ever have had access to anybody else. Period. That includes trainers.

Now do that, or I've won.

False dichotomy you dumbass.

That animal would be a threat to trainers regardless of whether it associates people with food.

For fucks sake a predator that large views people as a food source already.

Zoo animals are also, again, not in contac with people on a regular basis, those animals are not trained(usually) a trainer would have minimal contact, and the animals are fed via a large container of meat placed in a seperate section of the enclosure(no tigers present) And any other contact is done when the aminals are sedated.

A caged tiger is only a threat to morons. The man had to pass through a series of gates to get to those animals, do you realize that??? Otherwise to get inside that cage, he would have had to climb afence, jump down a rivine, and swim a moat... DSo, is that tiger going to be a threat to the general people? No... a threat to the trainers??? Not any more than it usually is...

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-09-28 04:48pm

Bullshit you fucking moron, look what I said, only fucking idiots like you would be at any risk. I dont have to prove it would never have contact with people again....you spew some shit about what happens in cases of animals that have free access to humans or that have a prolonged history of anti-social behaviour as if it's anything to do with a case like this.
You are so fucking stupid it actually hurts to read the shit you type.

Of course a prolonged psychological history has something to do with the issue. Didn't you actually read the Yellowstone source? Don't open your fucking mouth if you're just going to spout shit.

This tiger has been in a cage for several months, during which Iraq went under American gunsights for an extended period of time. Now it's bitten off the hand of somebody that tried to feed it. No threat, my ass.

A caged tiger is only a threat to morons. The man had to pass through a series of gates to get to those animals, do you realize that??? Otherwise to get inside that cage, he would have had to climb afence, jump down a rivine, and swim a moat... DSo, is that tiger going to be a threat to the general people? No... a threat to the trainers??? Not any more than it usually is...

Prove it. Prove the gates were there.

Zoo animals are also, again, not in contac with people on a regular basis, those animals are not trained(usually) a trainer would have minimal contact, and the animals are fed via a large container of meat placed in a seperate section of the enclosure(no tigers present) And any other contact is done when the aminals are sedated.

Prove it. Prove the tiger will never have contact with humans while conscious.

For fucks sake a predator that large views people as a food source already.

Yeah, and now it's lost the psychological deterrent. I win. Concessiona ccepted.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-09-28 04:53pm

For fuck's sake, the Zoo has just underwent a $27 million dollar refit, the cages did have seperate fucking feeding areas and proper fucking layout.

Bit someone trying to feed it? For fucks sake you make it sound like it bit some keeper doing his job, it didnt. It bit some fucking moron like you who probably had more rounds in his clip than funtioning braincells.

You ask for proof that something will never happen, that by definition is asking for proof of a negative. If proper procedures are followed then it will never have direct contact with humans without being doped up to the eyeballs.

Take your fucking concession accepted bullshit and cram it back up your obviously voluminous ass.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-09-28 05:17pm

Prove it. Prove the gates were there.

States in the opening article that the man passed through an antechamber to get to those bars... and the zoo had just had a refit. it had a proper layout.

Prove it. Prove the tiger will never have contact with humans while conscious.

Burden of proof fallacy. Standard procedure in mst zoos is not to make contact with un-sedated predators. So, under normal circumstances, it should never be in contact with humans ever again.

It is safe to assume they wont. Burden of proof is on you to support your contention that the tiger is a threat under normal circumstances.

Yeah, and now it's lost the psychological deterrent. I win. Concessiona ccepted.

what psychological deterrent? You think a tiger has qualms about tking human prey??? bullshit.

You have no fucking clue what you are talking about.

BY your logic, every tiger in the wild should be put down, because they are dangerous redators that could come into contact with humans.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-28 08:20pm

I like the way Kast simply ignored the various examples I linked to of zoo animals killing or injuring people without being put down.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-09-28 08:22pm

Darth Wong wrote:I like the way Kast simply ignored the various examples I linked to of zoo animals killing or injuring people without being put down.

Did you exect anything more of him?
He cant seem to grasp you have to be fucking stupid to be in danger from an animal in a cage.

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-09-28 10:54pm

Bit someone trying to feed it? For fucks sake you make it sound like it bit some keeper doing his job, it didnt. It bit some fucking moron like you who probably had more rounds in his clip than funtioning braincells.

It bit somebody with food. The psychological impact is still the same: humans are now more closely associated with food by a tiger who is already prone to extreme stress.

You ask for proof that something will never happen, that by definition is asking for proof of a negative. If proper procedures are followed then it will never have direct contact with humans without being doped up to the eyeballs.

And yet security precautions aren’t safe enough to ensure that an inebriated somebody can’t stick their hand into the enclosure to feed the animal.

Burden of proof fallacy. Standard procedure in mst zoos is not to make contact with un-sedated predators. So, under normal circumstances, it should never be in contact with humans ever again.

It is safe to assume they wont. Burden of proof is on you to support your contention that the tiger is a threat under normal circumstances.

The psychological barriers are already broken.

what psychological deterrent? You think a tiger has qualms about tking human prey??? bullshit.

You have no fucking clue what you are talking about.

BY your logic, every tiger in the wild should be put down, because they are dangerous redators that could come into contact with humans.

A tiger is a dangerous animal no matter what. Under stress however, the problem becomes worse. See, Yellowstone National Park.

I like the way Kast simply ignored the various examples I linked to of zoo animals killing or injuring people without being put down.

Are you fucking blind? I’ve proven again and again: animals suffering high levels of stress are usually the ones put down. Stuck in the middle of Baghdad, that animal fits the fucking profile.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-09-28 11:07pm

Axis Kast wrote: It bit somebody with food. The psychological impact is still the same: humans are now more closely associated with food by a tiger who is already prone to extreme stress.

You are a stupid fuck arent you?
Read all the shit already said about this.
They are large predators, if it isnt bigger and nastier, it's potential food....this hasnt changed.
Animals in zoo's associate humans with food anyway, they are the ones that feed them. Nothing is different.

Some stupid fuck sticking his hand in the cage is not how they are normally fed, its not a normal part of thier existence. I do suspect it would do the same again in the same situation, but then again, the same situation would again be the fault of a stupid fucking moron.

And yet security precautions aren?t safe enough to ensure that an inebriated somebody can?t stick their hand into the enclosure to feed the animal.

Moral of this, drunken parties at zoo's are bad.
For fucks sake, can you prove to me you will never get stuck by lightning?
You can show the chances of it are statistically insignificant, but that's the best you can do, because random chance can come into things. However, if you were to run around waving a metal rod over your head in a thunderstorm its much much more likely you'll get stuck by lightning isnt it?
Well, in this case, stupid people getting hurt by thier own fuckings stupidity is nothing for the rest of the fucking world to cry about.

The psychological barriers are already broken.

Where the fuck do you dredge up this psychology bullshit anyway? Its a marginally bullshit based area of "science" when applied to humans and is pretty much complete fucking drivel when applied to animals so cram it up that ass of yours.

A tiger is a dangerous animal no matter what. Under stress however, the problem becomes worse. See, Yellowstone National Park.

You are such a stupid fucking idiot. An animal in a cage cant hurt anyone not INSIDE the cage.

Are you fucking blind? I?ve proven again and again: animals suffering high levels of stress are usually the ones put down. Stuck in the middle of Baghdad, that animal fits the fucking profile.

Fuck up, the animals there are being well cared for since the end of the war and some have been sent to reserves in other parts of the world if they were too shook up by it all....so stop being such a fucking moron. One of the articles mentions animals being sent to both africa and asia. As well as western zoo's sending both supplies and funds, as well as many experts going there to aid them getting back on thier feet.

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-09-28 11:25pm

You are a stupid fuck arent you?
Read all the shit already said about this.
They are large predators, if it isnt bigger and nastier, it's potential food....this hasnt changed.
Animals in zoo's associate humans with food anyway, they are the ones that feed them. Nothing is different.

Some stupid fuck sticking his hand in the cage is not how they are normally fed, its not a normal part of thier existence. I do suspect it would do the same again in the same situation, but then again, the same situation would again be the fault of a stupid fucking moron.

It doesn’t matter if “a stupid fucking moron” did it; the tiger still attacked and partially devoured the limb of a human being with food. It will now associate the two even more closely.

And if predators always go after humans no matter what, explain why Yellowstone’s bears don’t always eat the people they maul.

Moral of this, drunken parties at zoo's are bad.
For fucks sake, can you prove to me you will never get stuck by lightning?
You can show the chances of it are statistically insignificant, but that's the best you can do, because random chance can come into things. However, if you were to run around waving a metal rod over your head in a thunderstorm its much much more likely you'll get stuck by lightning isnt it?
Well, in this case, stupid people getting hurt by thier own fuckings stupidity is nothing for the rest of the fucking world to cry about.

If the cage is too easily-entered, safety considerations must be made.

Where the fuck do you dredge up this psychology bullshit anyway? Its a marginally bullshit based area of "science" when applied to humans and is pretty much complete fucking drivel when applied to animals so cram it up that ass of yours.

When we talk about levels of aggression, you idiot. When Yellowstone National Park references “high-stress” animals.

ou are such a stupid fucking idiot. An animal in a cage cant hurt anyone not INSIDE the cage.

If people can easily get in, that’s a problem, too.

Fuck up, the animals there are being well cared for since the end of the war and some have been sent to reserves in other parts of the world if they were too shook up by it all....so stop being such a fucking moron. One of the articles mentions animals being sent to both africa and asia. As well as western zoo's sending both supplies and funds, as well as many experts going there to aid them getting back on thier feet.

I find it hard to believe somebody’s going to be able to erase all of what happen over the last six months …

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-09-28 11:28pm

Normal members of the public during opening hours arent allowed to do the shit a bunch of drunken armed assholes can after hours.
GETTING DRUNK INSIDE A FUCKING ZOO FULL OF LARGE PREDATORS, THEN STICKING YOUR FUCKING ARM IN IT'S FACE IS FUCKING STUPID! ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS IS YOUR OWN FUCKING FAULT, NOT THAT OF THE ANIMAL

Was that big enough and clear enough?

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-09-28 11:31pm

Normal members of the public can do some pretty stupid things.

Concession accepted.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-09-28 11:33pm

Axis Kast wrote:Normal members of the public can do some pretty stupid things.

Concession accepted.

Go back a bit and look at the links Mike put in....your concession is accepted numbnuts.

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-09-28 11:55pm

About animals not always being shot?

Go back and look at the Yellowstone National Park links. Animals with high stress. At the elephant links. Zoo animals can be put down.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-09-28 11:57pm

Axis Kast wrote:About animals not always being shot?

Go back and look at the Yellowstone National Park links. Animals with high stress. At the elephant links. Zoo animals can be put down.

Yellowstone is not a fucking war zone or a fucking zoo last I looked.

As for the animals at zoo's the elephants had fucking histories of aggression.

So yet again we come back to the issue of animals in zoo's not being executed because people are fucking stupid.