The “USAF” part in this quote refers to Airman’s full user name, Airman Doors, USAF. He was calling the good Airman a murderer.
Haj
Goddamnit, Gobear, I accused him of no such thing. My father was career Air Force and was in Southeast Asia during Viet Nam. Practically every male in my family, including me, is or has been in the military. I never said we were targeting civilians. My point is only that saying America, as a whole, would be culpable for civilian casualties is not the same as a personal insult of Airman. I’m only talking about GD rules. I don’t give a shit about the larger topic.
We don’t need to accuse you of hating soldiers Diogenes. It’s quite clear that you do, if you would rather have 1,000 of them die than one Iraqi child.
What are you fucking talking about? I never said anything “made us bad.”
The way I read it, he was using USAJF as a form of address, but he specifically said “we are going to purposefully target civilians…” we, not you. And, again, whether we are or or not going to target civilians is irrelevant to whether Colinto violated GD rules.
I’ve been in the military, Debaser.
Forgot the link to the 1,000 US soldiers to 1 Iraqi baby thread.
Yes you did. One hour and 15 minutes ago you said this:
You say that those jumping on Colinit are full of shit, and then repeat his claims that technology has made us murderers, collectively as a country, on innocent people. It is obvious what your meaning is here.
I would like to know what civilians we all share responsibility for the murder of. :wally
Did you even read the quote that started this ruckus which I posted for you?
When he said, “murderers” he was NOT referring to the culpability of America as a whole, but to the USAF, of which AirmanDoorsUSAF is a member.
You didn’t say it, but you are defending the guy who did.
If this jerk had said that US soldiers in the Gulf War targeted civilians, would you feel personally insulted or not?
he actually said no such thing.
and see, this is the difference - you’re specifying Diogenes the poster as having these intentions/feelings (incorrectly, but still specifying) whereas the poster of the original complaint specified a group, yes, of which Airman is a member, but again, according to the GD rules, personal insults aren’t allowed. Nothing is said about gratuitous, erroneous, vile generalized group insults.
I know.
I’m not saying I understand you. Maybe you’re some sort of self loather on a guilt trip.
He said, “We are going to purposefully target civilians.” Unless he, too, is a member of the USAF, then I would have to interpret his “we” as a collective “we”. He didn’t say “You are going to purposefully target civilians,” or “They are going to purposefully target civilians.” Regardless of the factuality of the statement, I don’t see him singling out either Airman Doors or even the USAF as murderers.
gobear do you not note the inconsistency that you’re espousing???
(paraphrased) “no, he’s not claiming that Americans (of which Airman is one) is guilty of this vile thing, he’s claiming that UASF (of which Airman is one) is guilty of this vile thing, therefore he’s claiming that Airman personally is guilty of this vile thing”.
we can resent like hell, feel insulted, disprove, argue against etc that inclusion in that group means that we take on all characterisitics/ blames of that group, we can argue, resent like hell, feel insulted, disprove etc that the original characterization of that group is wrong etc.
**but ** it ain’t the same thing as claiming that you, personally, because you’re a member of that group are also guilty of that vile thing. at least in reference to ’ breaking the rules in GD’ is concerned. which is, again, the subject of this thread.
Let’s examine the two sentences which you bolde in my statement above.
-
“Targeting civilians is murder!” What’s the problem here? This is a true statement, is it not? Are you saying it’s not murder? I didn’t say that we were doing this, I was saying that, in a vaccuum, it’s wrong to target civilians.
-
“We share collective responsiblity as a nation for the murder of civilians.” Again, what;s wrong with this statement? I didn’t say that we had murdered civilians, only that we are responsible if we do.
Yes he did.
Diogenes in this thread:
Not a lot of room for interpretation of this statement.
When people start flaming him for it we get this statement from him:
After about a half dozen posts, Diogenes does finally get it and apoligizes here:
Ya. Maybe it was a little over the top.
Jackass.
He called Airman a murderer. He said that USAF says it all. Murderers. He called Airman Doors, USAF a murderer.
Debaser - my comment to you here was based on your statements here and his statements here. I wasn’t party to that other thread, nor had it been linked. if you’d included that in your statement here, I’d have understood that you’re bringing stuff in from a different thread.
There’s no inconsistency. If the offending person had said “Americans”, the charge is just more liberal chestbeating becuase the target is too diffuse. But accusing the profession to which one belongs of being criminal is a lot more specific.
You’re the one exhibiting contemptible behavior here. I’ve made no excuse for Colinito67’s offensive remarks. On the other hand, you seem to grasping at any sleazy rhetorical device you can find in order to deflect responsibility for your own assinine behavior. This isn’t a black and white Colinto/Airman* dichotomy, and it’s dishonest to try to paint it those terms.
- It might have been, if you hadn’t overeacted so violently, but that’s mucked up the issue, and tainted your credibility.
*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic *
Refer back to my running over children in the playground argument. If I say “Diogenes owns a big car! Running over children in the playground is wrong!!! Diogenes is responsible for children run over in the playground by his car!” I am not directly accusing you of anything, right? But, what am I inferring? Your statments about the US targeting civilians were the same.
It is logical to infer that there was some civilians that have been murdered for you to be saying this. Although, you never claimed it directly, it was clearly what you were meaning.
Oh, and sorry, wring. I meant to include the link with my first post here. My bad.
gobear, Airman belongs to both groups. Again, the issue is what constitutes a warnable ‘personal insult’ in Great Debates at SDMB.
and daily there are hugely insulting things said about damn near every group some one can (and does) belong in. And these are routinely not seen as personal insults.
At the bar saying stuff about USAF to a guy in uniform, I agree they’d be correct in assuming a personal insult.
however, in GD at SDMB, personal insults are exactly that. saying “you’re an idiot”, not “Americans are idiots”.
I do not hate the military, Debaser, as I keep saying, I’m from a military family. I grew up on Air Force bases, I’ve served in the Navy. I do not want sodiers to die. If you read my statements towards the end of the thread yo linked to, you will see that I backed off my initial hyperbole quite a bit and really made an attempt to revise and clarify my position. I am against the invasion of Iraq, but I don’t hold the individual troops responsible in any way. I think they’re the victims of some irresponsible policies by the Bush administration and I would rather they were back here with their families than sitting around in the sand waiting to maybe get nerve gas or anthrax thrown at them. I do think that our government has made some immoral choices, here and, of course, YMMV, but I don’t think that makes the soldiers, themselves immoral. I hope that’s clear to you, now.