Stop reveling in the spilling of other people’s blood. You do your precious fellow servicemembers no honor whatsoever by trumpeting their superior ability in killing as “bravery”. There’s plenty of what is good and right in humanity that you should rightly point out without trying to glorify a Damn Fool War[sup]TM[/sup] in the process.
Stop the war. Bring the troops home now.
This announcement has been placed in the Pit in anticipation of War Heroes Threads VIII and IX, so as to comply with Coldfire’s request that I “take my fight elsewhere”. Here is the fight, and it will be linked to in the forthcoming threads.
And a hearty “Fuck You” to Loach, just 'cos he’s a whiny little weasel.
olent, I disagree with Moto’s series as well. But your OP here is pointlessly inflammatory, and can only lead to a shitfight, rather than an analysis of the issues and a decent debate.
Yes, the War in Iraq is unconscionable. Shitting all over threads about decorated soldiers is still being a fucking dick.
You dragged your shit into a thread about a soldier who led his mates back to safety through hostile terrority in an ordeal that lasted 16 hours. In fucking Afghanistan. What a dick.
Fucking right, it’s shameful that good men and women are serving in Iraq for dubious reasons. You don’t have to shit on them, too. What the hell are you thinking?
Mr Motto has been posting a series of pieces on officers and enlisted members of the armed forces who have been decorated for gallantry and exemplary performance of duty in combat in Iraq. Since combat involves killing people, or at least a serious attempt to do them harm, Olentzero has been loudly and vociferously horrified by the whole thing. It’s sort of pointless but it amuses some people.
Cry me a fucking river, shitferbrains. Mr. Moto wasn’t exactly ponyless.
lambchops, there have actually been a couple of decent debates in the earlier threads, and I started one MPSIMS thread myself to offer a counterweight of sorts. The problem was I didn’t have as much time as I’d have liked to find specific incidences of troop demoralization and actions against their deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq to balance out the whole “Glory Hallelujah for Our Fighting Boys” track this was on. I wanted to make my feelings about the threads known, and do it in a civil way that wouldn’t degenerate into a shitfight about the justification for the wars in the Middle East.
minty green, six out of the seven men cited for “bravery” in those threads took human lives in the incidents cited. I’ve said before I’m well aware killing happens in war, but that doesn’t mean I think it should be called “bravery” and shouted from the rooftops. Mr. Moto has said explicitly that he feels the actions of these men should be more widely known. It’s reveling in the spilling of others’ blood and that sickens me.
stockton - Link to the latest thread, which has links to the other six in the OP.
Larry, if I called the soldiers “baby killers” and “murderers” in every thread, I could see the charge of shitting on them. But calling for an end to the war, and bringing the troops home so they don’t have to fucking die trying to save their buddies and being forced to kill Iraqis while doing so, is most definitely not shitting on them. “Stay there, fight longer, come home a psychic wreck or in a coffin, boys. Keep up the good work.” Yeah, that’s really supporting our troops.
Fair enough retort, but he also announced in the first thread that he would be posting a series of threads. If this was such a slap in the face to your delicate sensibilities, you should have posted a pit thread or contacted a mod earlier. Instead, you took the low road and defecated (IIRC, you don’t deserve the benefit of research right now) in the threads with the same tired post, usually as the second poster (5 out of 7, I believe) and within minutes of the OP.
I will grant you that the first time you did it, it was pretty effective, and I almost bought into it. It lost some potency by the third time, and all of it when you pulled out the rebuttal of a 5 year old, namely, “Your not the boss of me” or words to that effect.
Grow the hell up, would you? You post enough to know the “Don’t be a jerk” rule. You’re for the war? Great. You’re completely opposed to it with every shred of your being? That’s great too. Everyone’s entitled to an opinion, and I don’t begrudge you yours, whether it jives with mine or not. But Mr. Moto specifically posted into a thread that basically forbids debate for a reason.
If you disagree with what he posted, you would be better served to open a pit thread about it rather than defacing the intent of his posts.
Olentzero, I understand your frustration, and I agree that this war is something that should never have happened. But Mr. Moto is not glorifying war. He is recognizing soldiers/sailors/marines who did an exemplary job in the service of their country. That’s something they don’t hear too often.
I don’t understand why you cant see the difference between the administration ordering those soldiers over there and the soldiers who get sent. They have no choice in the matter. They are there because they swore an oath to be there if they were called. This is not like a civilian job, where you just leave if you don’t like the office politics. It’s. The. Military. This is what they’re here for. And everyone understands, when they sign up, they may be called on to do this.
Olentzero, I just wanted to make sure that I’ve got this right: Mr. Moto is a “sick fucking ghoul” because he’s opened a number of (brief) threads to recount acts of heroism?
No, I think you’re calling him names because you can’t see past your own parochial agenda. For God sakes, man, can’t you see that Mr. Moto isn’t extolling the virtues of GWB, or “the invasion”, and certainly not of war in general. He is simply describing bravery. He is reminding us that there are those who would give their lives for their comrades.
Mr Moto’s certainly well-intentioned, but his series of threads worries me for two reasons:
Describing soldiers in a conflict as “heroes” tends to suggest that they are fighting for good purposes. That is, the individual characteristics of the soldiers are difficult to separate from the morality of the war, especially if their individual characteristics (bravery, supporting their fellow soldiers) are harnessed towards a negative outcome (the invasion and subjugation of Iraq).
Therefore, by lauding these soldiers for bravery in achieving their mission in Iraq, you are supporting their mission in Iraq. The threads have a strong political undertone, even if this is not the intention
Glorifying people for killing large numbers of other people is not correct, whether all involved are soldiers or not.
Oh, I think he does. Not that it’s particularly relevant; just posting to underscore that this little tantrum is all “IYO.” Bizarre, frankly, but hey, your time’s your own.
Mr. Moto is merely offering concrete counter-examples to all the negative “19 men killed in friendly fire/American soldiers shoot up a wedding party/Abu Ghraib/generalized ‘Iraq is a quagmire and American soldiers appear to be largely incompetent’” stories upon which the media seems to feast.
I’m very glad he’s doing it. Good job, Mr. Moto. Thank you.
I think this war is wrong, if not outright evil, and that the people responsible for it (a portion of the current administration, in case someone’s not keeping track) should face trial as war criminals.
However, even if the war is wrong and/or evil, and some of the troops are performing evil acts (i.e. torture, rape, murder, etc), that does not mean all troops are evil. Glorifying acts of heroism is not glorifying the war, it’s reminding us that even in the midst of evil, good things can be done, good acts performed. Killing Iraqis isn’t the good thing, saving your fellow soldiers is.
Or do you propose that we be ashamed of our troops who do as they’ve been trained, and save their lives, and the lives of their fellow soldiers?