With any luck, this attitude will manifest itself during his officer training, and he will wash out as unsuitable.
Robin
Skip and Milroy, under normal circumstances I would concur. But what we have here is that the person in question has, in fact, made his attitudes known to a particular subset of those who employ him – to wit, us, as American citizens with memberships on a particular Internet message board. The armed services work for the American people. Their oath is not to George Bush or Congress but to the Constitution – in effect, to “We the people” who pay them to represent us in matters requiring armed intervention.
What he said about duty, honor, and country struck home. There’s no doubt that it takes a special sort of person to do those things in our behalf. But there’s also the requirement that he be defending and representing us in what he says or does. That’s why there are limits on what a military man may say or do that do not exist for civilians – because he has chosen to volunteer for a tough job in which he acts in behalf of the rest of us.
That being the case, this man is not a person I want to represent my country, given his callous distaste for other human beings’ feelings, freedoms, and in the thread in question even their lives.
I agree that taking someone’s opinions to their employer would generally be over the top. But we’re not talking about a guy making components for widgets at the Amalgamated Widget Corp. factory – this is a man who is sworn to uphold the Constitution and represent the U.S.A. as a free society where basic human rights are protected. And it’s clear to me that he refutes that oath with every word he types on here.
That’s where I see the difference.
Dear sweet Lord.
And I actually found a good word to say for the guy, lately. Shouldn’t have shot my mouth off, should I?
That is a truly despicable attitude to hold.
What the fuck is with his handle? I thought he said it was his real name…
::shrug:: I thought it was a leet-ish way of saying “fuck you, man”.
When I read his first post in the thread, I thought it was pretty obvious that he was playing Devil’s Advocate. Looking at his subsequent posts, it appears I was wrong.
Note to self: when playing Devil’s Advocate, specifically so state.
What SkipMagic and milroyj said. In spades.
If the mods believe his actions constituted “being a jerk”, then ban him.
Unless and until he has committed a crime of any sort, any further action is a grotesque over-reaction, and a serious abuse of power.
You want to get him kicked out of the Air Force because you don’t like what he says on a messageboard? You want the mods to give out his name and his personal details, against his will and without his permission, to non-members of the board, because you disagree with what he says?
If you don’t like what he says, flame him. Or ignore him.
Or they better put something in the registration agreement that says, “If you piss us off bad enough, we will try to get you fired from your job. So once we start a pile-on, don’t contradict us, or all that crap about confidentiality is out the window.”
Regards,
Shodan
No. He has shown a lack of regard for both the meaning and the implementation of Amendment 8 of the Bill of Rights (as well as more than slightly disrespect for life, but that’s another matter). Last I checked, as a member of the US Armed Forces, he is required to uphold, protect and defend same Amendment (along with a few others). If it were a question of merely not liking what he said, I think someone would probably have tried to get Airman Doors out of the USAF a while ago (this does not mean I think AD is ever wrong per se but that others certainly have thought as much).
Hell, there are people that think I’ve never been right.
Anyway, if there must be some sort of repercussion from this, banning is about as far as I’m willing to advocate. There is no reason to attampt to sabotage his career. With the kinds of stuff I’ve seen him say, he’ll take care of that all by himself.
I take your point, and withdraw that comment insofar as the board will permit me to. But I am disgusted more than I can say at the idea that someone who espouses the attitudes he expresses will be sent to college and created an officer in the armed services, if he doesn’t shoot himself in the foot beforehand.
I’m certain you’re not alone here. However, for better or worse, he has the same right to freedom of expression as anyone else. Even complete morons have First Ammendment rights, in this country. 
The board administration also has the right to ban his sorry ass for whatever reason they see fit. I can’t see myself raising much of a fuss if they were to excercise said right, in this instance.
He is entitled to an informed opinion, to be sure. And in many fora (in the general meaning, not the message board meaning) he is entitled to express whatever opinion he has. He doesn’t have freedom of speech here, though, as this board is private property. This is why our posts may be edited without our permission, or entire posts or even threads deleted, and while we may feel our gripe is legitimate, ultimately the ChiReader can decide to delete everything tomorrow and there isn’t much (as far as I know, anyway) that any of us could do about it.
I’m fairly sure you didn’t mean to imply that he has freedom of speech here. Just making sure, since that’s a viewpoint many of us have seen expressed more than once on this MB, and one that’s certainly far from the case in theory (though fortunately rarely in practice).
But, why ban him because he said something deplorable? As far as I can see, he didn’t violate any of the board rules.
Guess I could have been clearer on the point, but that’s what I was saying in my second paragraph–or at least trying to.
That depends on his intent. If he actually believes this tripe he is spouting, then, no, I don’t think he’s broken any rules, either unless this fits the rather broad rule about not being a jerk. On the other hand if, as I and probably others suspect, he’s only saying it to get a rise out of people, well, there’s a rule on that.
From what I’ve read of his other posts, I believe he really does think this way. (Pause for retching) So a bridge-dweller eviction seems uncalled for. I’ve known people (fortunately very few) like him before, and while yes, they do get a kick out of pissing off others, they also do believe the sort of offal he’s most recently outraged us with.
OTOH, a good old-fashioned shunning whenever he tosses a steaming bundle of glurge into a thread might be a good idea.
One that, of course, will never be followed.
Of course, instead of flaming him, we could try and educate him as to his errors of reason. You know, fighting ignorance?
qts I suggest you read all of the thread in question. More than one person tried to explain to him why his logic was faulty, and he’d post again, still spewing that sewage he calls an opinion. I am deeply troubled that this man is already a Staff Seargant, and may end up a commissioned officer.
I really just had to read this thread because, when Siege finds it in her mild-mannered self to pit someone, I feel this driving compulsion to find out what someone has done that’s so vile it can move even her to say bad things about them! And, indeed, if ever there was a Doper that needed pitting, it’s this asshole!
I suppose all we can do is report his post history to the moderators and let them decide. I just wanted to point out that calling for someone’s banning because of what they said (however vitriolic and deplorable) didn’t make sense.