I don’t know how you could make that distinction. I mean, if the people in the military/government establishment do something are morally culpable for ordering something that’s wrong, then aren’t the people who follow those orders equally morally culpable?
Oh, Xeno! 
“we who target civilians are murderers” I would say suggests that the key factor is the targeting civilians. Your right lib it ain’t rocket science. the way I see that sentence is that those who target civilians are murderers, (including airmen who do so, politicians who do so, etc.).
In any event, I still see it as a generalized comment the same as the million or so offensive things december says. (yes that was an exaggeration, before anyone wants demonstration of the number)
While I agree that our fighting soldiers are not in fact murderers, I do feel, however, that one has the right to say so if that is what they believe. IIRC, that is what many Airmen fought, killed and died for.
leander taint a right to free speech argument, it’s an arguement about what is considered a personal insult in GD here at the SDMB.
I know you admitted it was wrong but I am wondering what the “yellow” in “yellow bastard” supposed to mean? Curious.
doesn’t yellow mean cowardly in that context?
yellow=cowardly
Well, okay. Then by this:
“Don’t you EVER call me that again, you yellow bastard.”
One could reasonably rule that AirmanDoors was simply saying don’t ever call me a yellow bastard again. Anytime you lift something from context, it can mean almost anything.
Believe me, I’m not taking AirmanDoors’ side because we’re buddies or anything. I mean, he has made plain that I am despicable to him. I’m just saying that it seems clear to me that he was called a murderer.
the direct insult in that sentence, lib was “you yellow bastard”. clear as day.
and actually, seeing the kid’s entire post it’s even more clear to me that he was making a generalized comment about military/politicians etc who target civilians in a war setting. I simply don’t see it as a specific insult to Airman himself, personally. Obviously he did. Obviously DavidB didn’t.
wring, I think it might be. If someone wants to make a blanket statement that all soldiers are murderers, they can certainly do so, IMHO. I believe Airman thinks otherwise, as he stated above
And like I said, I happen to disagree, though the lines can be a bit blurry depending upon one’s point of view.
But at the end of the day, if someone wants to say all Airmen are murderers, I believe they have the right to do so. Even in Great Debates. (Course, it’d be nice if they actually “debated” the point…)
But would you have, without David B.'s advice ?
You’re being pretty cheeky about this, given that the mod in question was just doing his fucking job ! If you still feel wronged, why not take on Colinito67 ? He’s the Osama to David B.'s Saddam.
leander - the point I was trying to make is that Airman’s apparent complaint was that he was yelled at for a personal insult in GD. Which aren’t allowed in GD (freedom of speech beside the point, we are not ‘free’ to make personal insults in GD here, we’ll get yelled at, perhaps have our posting priveleges revoked etc.).
and that the difference to me between what Airman said (which was clearly a personal insult to another poster) and what the other poster said, was that at least to me the other comment was a generalized one about a classification of people, who may or maynot include Airman.
wring - ok, I agree. Sorry for the confusion (on my part).
Thanks, wring and pepperlandgirl
It seems to me that someone accidentally delivered a shipment of fresh jackass to the SDMB recently. It’s manifesting itself both in this forum and in GD, apparently.
IMO the comment that got Airman riled up ought to have gotten its poster just as sternly warned.
Oh Lib!
How’s it feel, wring?
how’s what feel?
Let’s analyze this.
“USAF, that says it all”. Ok, so he’s talking about the USAF as a whole.
“technology has made war immoral.” Ok, so he thinks that because we have high tech weaponry, it makes it immoral for us to go to war. (I guess someone killed with a sword isn’t as killed as someone killed with a bomb? Or it’s somehow more right to make war “fair”?)
““Shock and Awe.”” So, apparently we use all these high tech weapons to shock and awe our enemies into submission by demonstrating our technological superiority, rather than killing them fair and square with some low tech weaponry. Maybe we should send in the Air Force in with WW2 era equipment then, to make it more fair for Iraq?
“We are going to purposefully target civilians.” Referring back to the first statement, “we” in this case refers to the USAF. So, he’s claiming that the USAF is in a conspiracy to specifically target and murder civilians in case of war with Iraq.
““There won’t be a safe place in Baghdad.”” Iraqi civilians apparently will be stuck in the city while the USAF carpet bombs Baghdad and pounds it into the dust from whence it came.
“murderers.” This is the summation of the cognitive points presented in his argument. Airman Doors, being a member of the USAF, is a murderer because the USAF is in a conspiracy to commit mass murder in Iraq, if they have not done so already.
Now, this leads me to conclude that Colinito67 is a fucking clueless idiot. It also leads me to conclude that he was personally insulting Airman Doors by declaring the USAF to be a bunch of murderers conspiring to murder even more. I don’t see how anyone can infer a different meaning.